~ archived since 2018 ~
Popular
Other
rudybasd
[removed]
[–]AvailableRow179128 points29 points30 points 5 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Most people in nowadays society, especially women prefer the victim part and if you actually try to help them out of decency they will despise you as you will break their role.
It's best to be morally grey, this goes long way for good people that want to do ''the right thing'' - I had tried to help people and it always backfired be it at work, be it in life - if someone truly needs help he will reach out in private, not brag like drama queen about it.
[–]Trp272727210 points11 points12 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
women prefer the victim part and if you actually try to help them out of decency they will despise you.
Facts, women want to be able to moan about their problems. They don’t actually want solutions to their problems. The amount of times a girl has complained to me about something going on in their life and I offer a completely reasonable, logical explanation of how to solve that problem pretty much instantly - all you’re left with is dirty looks, reasons why it won’t work and being told you’re ‘mansplaining’. Being captain save-a-hoe never got anyone anywhere.
[–]rudybasd[S] 2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Great point. And loved the breaking their role part
[–]AshyLarry274 points5 points6 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
We're caught at interesting crossroads with philosophy, especially when discussing morals. It is some of the tremendous work of most philosophers that facilitates are ability to think beyond the surface about life, situations, and people. You look at life differently, you become more aware of things, you challenge things more.
As you note, most philosophers try to find a consistent framework for their morals, and I think this is where things get interesting. It is sold as if by having a consistent moral framework, you are a more elevated being, because you can approach situations from the most logical and moral position. As you also point out, TRP's more "a-moral" take on life has also opened a plethora of doors that moral philosophers never seemed to have the right keys to unlock.
Ultimately, the take home message is moderation. Use philosophy to exercise and challenge your brain, make you think, and that is it. You offer a great list of philosophers at the end who can help accomplish this. A moral framework may make you feel more consistent and whole, but this feeling is only as fulfilling as the moment you run into the intangible barriers of life. The "nice guy finish last"-esque moments.
[–]rudybasd[S] 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
100% it was invented to challenge everything, from everything that life has put upon us to struggle with, from ourselves to the sciences that we live upon, whether it was physics, chemistry, biology etc... to life itself. it encompasses everything and its the father of all the sciences. And when it comes to morals, it challenges everything that surrounds morality, and the philosophers that I've mentioned the likes of Nietzsche and Schopenhauer, Hobbes are hard for some to understand if they don't have some philosophical background of the old ideas specifically those of greek philosophers, so it's also better that nobody would start right off the bat with them, and its also much better to start with the greek philosophy and not take it as seriously or as a way of life as it shouldn't, according to my personal opinion, and then climb the ladder step by step to arrive at these that I've mentioned to give you the clearer and more broader picture of what life really is, and how to interact with it etc...
[–]1arakouzo2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Why not tie this post into The Red Pill somehow?
[–]5ItsDantesWorld2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
the Greek Philosophy that speaks of virtue and how to be good
Reminds me of Aristotle. In his Nicomachean Ethics, he explores what it means to be a virtuous man. At the end he concludes that the path to happiness is through philosophic study, and embodiment of virtuous living.
I believe that is the path for most men, because in the end, his virtues were contingent with living as a good man and productive member of a society.
You bring up Nietzsche, and my understanding of his will to power, is that a man will use whatever means necessary to impose his will over the world -- do anything to achieve his goals, innocents be damned. In his Genealogy of Morals, he clearly states how he sees those who are meek and innocent by nature, like rabbits, are merely weaklings, where as those who are ruthless and murderous by nature, are wild and untamed lions. The man who is capable of great violence yet can restrain himself is the most "human". However, these third types of men have to be willing to get dirty, to do "evil" in order to achieve their goals -- and then we question what really is "good" and "evil"?
Most of the Greeks believed there were concrete definitions of what is good or evil, yet I find Nietzsche to use Protagoras's definition -- what may appear evil to you may be good for me, but ultimately one action is truly evil.
I interpret that to mean: Murder is always an evil act, yet there are some instances where it was a good choice to murder someone, like a serial killer.
Both Nietzsche and Evola assert that should we form our own moral codes, we cannot ever live in an evil manner because we are the determinant of our own morals. Gangsters are killers, but they are not evil because they follow their own rule of spare the kids.
To conclude, I say yes, being morally good is good for our mental and spiritual health, only if the morals we abide by are of our own creation, and not morals forced upon us from outside influences.
[–]Senior Contributoradam-l1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
I've figured out that nobody really gives a fuck about you, nobody!
You've probably skipped Epicurus. Mistake.
[–]rudybasd[S] 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Can you offer some of his arguments please? It would be useful for those who read the post and checking out the comments. Just a little bit of it if you like
[–]Senior Contributoradam-l2 points3 points4 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Epicurus was about living life in its fullest, as opposed to Stoicism's focus on coping with pain and doing as good as possible.
Pleasure is man's persuit. Virtue is a pleasure to the virtuous.
The greatest joy in life comes from having good friends on which you can depend.
Now, it is a specific trait of US society, and more generally of the Western world, that men are friendless, "competition" being the highest virtue. (Maybe the size of the country, and people often moving far also has to do with it.) In other places of the world, trustworthy friendships that last a lifetime is still a thing.
[–]what_cube1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
My main moral compass is to don't actively pursuing a plate that has a boyfriend who I know of.
[–]Red-Pill-Redemption0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Morally good according to what standard? The morality society has taught you, or a higher, objective morality? In regards to your post, yes, it makes sense to be sort of morally good relative to society’s standards. In the case of the latter, it is always good to be morally good.
[–]rudybasd[S] 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Morally good in thinking that doing the good or providing the good will yield the outcome that you're aiming at. Forget society's standards, it's rather human nature that is playing its part here because when you are doing the good, and if our nature was good and needed the good, it wouldn't act in that manner "Against" you for doing the good, it should have reciprocated with a good as well.
[–]urbanfoh0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I've found that in a hyper moral world where every deed must be morally, ethically justified, egoism is a very refreshing trait.
Most people who start in TRP have to learn that is is okay to treat themselves first. Any conception of morality makes you inevitably prone to manipulation as morality is seldom consistent in itself.
But putting yourself first gives you a clear roadmap in the short term and on another note women seem to respond quite well to confident egoism. A woman is bound by their social circle to act "right", men have the ability to go their own way and gather ressources for themselves (and potential families)
[–]libal4440 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
You absolutely need morals. Your morals are a compass with which you can traverse the field that is life. You need to be able to distinguish what is right and wrong to take the correct decision in the choices you are presented with everyday.
The questions becomes whether what is right/wrong for you is the same for everyone else. Is there an objective morally good that you need to strive for ? Is it morally good to take decisions that benefit you to the detriment of others, some would say yes, some no.
I think everybody needs to have a moral compass and strive to do right by it. I also think that you need to make that compass yourself though.
[–]awihsoj0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Any philosophical books you can reccomend that demonstrates what your talking about? Or even better the direct sources where you got this from if you remeber?
© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.created by /u/dream-hunter
[–]AvailableRow179128 points29 points30 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]Trp272727210 points11 points12 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]rudybasd[S] 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]AshyLarry274 points5 points6 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]rudybasd[S] 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]1arakouzo2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]5ItsDantesWorld2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Senior Contributoradam-l1 point2 points3 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]rudybasd[S] 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Senior Contributoradam-l2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]what_cube1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Red-Pill-Redemption0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]rudybasd[S] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]urbanfoh0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]libal4440 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]awihsoj0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link