What other philosophy is RedPill worthy? (self.asktrp)

submitted by [deleted]

I believe Red pill is a life/paradigm changer.

If one wants to increase their awareness in the world what other gamechanging philosophies are there that you have experienced? Subreddits?

edit: thanks for all the answers will work my way through them

[–]lietruth 42 points43 points  (3 children)

Stoicism. Read Meditations by Marcus Aurelius.

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Awesome found it on Project Gutenberg website for free

[–][deleted] 10 points11 points  (0 children)

great minds think alike i see

[–]bigtuna45 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Guide to the good life is also a good one.

[–]ddaarrkkssttaar 20 points21 points  (1 child)

Stoicism. Read marcus aurelius meditations

[–]lietruth 17 points18 points  (0 children)

Great minds think alike I can see.

[–][deleted] 20 points21 points  (2 children)

Stoicism. Meditations by Marcus Aurelius is a good thing to read.

[–][deleted]  (1 child)


    [–]hamstercide 3 points4 points  (0 children)

    Stoicism. Read the Enchiridion by Epictetus.

    [–]AwakenedSovereign 4 points5 points  (3 children)


    [–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (2 children)

    What's the definitive text to read?

    [–][deleted] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

    Nothing, because it's meaningless, like life./s

    [–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

    But otherwise Nietzsche or Satre. The nature of the philosophy means it ranges quite a bit between philosophers. Thus Spoke Zarathustra is a great work and enjoyable read. Many of those published after Nietzsche's death were good too, they weren't released initially due to politics.

    I'll add some info, feel free to skip:

    Main Beliefs Unlike René Descartes, who believed in the primacy of conciousness, Existentialists assert that a human being is "thrown into" into a concrete, inveterate universe that cannot be "thought away", and therefore existence ("being in the world") precedes consciousness, and is the ultimate reality. Existence, then, is prior to essence (essence is the meaning that may be ascribed to life), contrary to traditional philosophical views dating back to the ancient Greeks. As Sartre put it: "At first [Man] is nothing. Only afterward will he be something, and he himself will have made what he will be."

    Kierkegaard saw rationality as a mechanism humans use to counter their existential anxiety, their fear of being in the world. Sartre saw rationality as a form of "bad faith", an attempt by the self to impose structure on a fundamentally irrational and random world of phenomena ("the other"). This bad faith hinders us from finding meaning in freedom, and confines us within everyday experience.

    Kierkegaard also stressed that individuals must choose their own way without the aid of universal, objective standards. Friedrich Nietzsche further contended that the individual must decide which situations are to count as moral situations. Thus, most Existentialists believe that personal experience and acting on one's own convictions are essential in arriving at the truth, and that the understanding of a situation by someone involved in that situation is superior to that of a detached, objective observer (similar to the concept of Subjectivism).

    According to Camus, when an individual's longing for order collides with the real world's lack of order, the result is absurdity. Human beings are therefore subjects in an indifferent, ambiguous and absurd universe, in which meaning is not provided by the natural order, but rather can be created (however provisionally and unstably) by human actions and interpretations.

    Existentialism can be atheistic, theological (or theistic) or agnostic. Some Existentialists, like Nietzsche, proclaimed that "God is dead" and that the concept of God is obsolete. Others, like Kierkegaard, were intensely religious, even if they did not feel able to justify it. The important factor for Existentialists is the freedom of choice to believe or not to believe.

    [–]648262[🍰] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

    Plato, Aurelius and Nietzsche can be recommended.

    [–]our_guile 5 points6 points  (1 child)

    Read The Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand.

    [–]dabrah1 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    second this. Atlas Shrugged is like 1100 pages, 100% would read again though. Really changed my perspective on capitalism.

    [–]IIlllIllIIIllIl 1 point2 points  (4 children)

    Check out Dark Enlightenment. I haven't looked into it deep, but its new on Reddit and interesting. Something along the lines of democracy being a poor governmental method. But like I said, haven't read into it much, you be the judge.

    [–]teolinzo 1 point2 points  (3 children)

    Democracy as a whole is a weak form of government which is why we in the United States have a representative republic which is basically a foe "democracy" democracies essentially become tyrannical majorities run by retards (I.e. People who voted for Hilary) who were created and formed via mainstream media and pop culture which essentially brainwashes those weak minded individuals. Look back at every ancient civilization who prided themselves on being a pure democracy..... they all failed.

    [–]Ganaria_Gente 3 points4 points  (0 children)

    democracy is the least shitty of governance in human history

    ....but its still pretty fucking shitty

    [–]our_guile 1 point2 points  (1 child)

    A Republic is representative by definition. What the United States has is a Democratic Republic. It may be semantics, but needed clarification.

    [–]teolinzo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    Noted! Thank you.

    [–]jupc 1 point2 points  (1 child)

    Anti-fragility and uncertainty.

    See the Incerto series by Nassim Taleb:

    --Fooled by Randomness: The Hidden Role of Chance in Life and in the Markets. 2nd ed., 2005.

    --The Black Swan: The Impact of the Highly Improbable. 2007. ISBN 978-1-4000-6351-2. expanded 2nd ed, 2010

    --The Bed of Procrustes: Philosophical and Practical Aphorisms. Random House. 2010. ISBN 978-1-4000-6997-2.

    --Antifragile: Things That Gain from Disorder. New York: Random House. 2012. ISBN 978-1-4000-6782-4.

    [–]JackGetsIt 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    Great suggestions. I think Taleb will go down as one of the great intellectuals of our time. He's truly an independent thinker. I do wish he rambled less in his books. I enjoyed Fooled by Randomness but he kind of roams around and struggles to stick to his thesis and doesn't really sell the book hard with good writing. The core philosophy is sound though.

    I have yet to read Antifragile but I've read a few of the countless bloggers that quickly sought to monetize his theory into short online articles.

    [–]The_BitterTruth 3 points4 points  (2 children)

    I think buddhism. A lot of it deals with removing world desires - maybe the opposite of hedonism?

    [–]Ganaria_Gente 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    thats interesting

    im an unapologetic hedonist, but fortunately, my definition of 'pleasure' is much narrower (and healthier, and cheaper) than what many others would define it as.

    to me, life is for one's pleasure before anything else. sure, i may be selfish, but eh.


    [–]2comment 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    Idk if it's a philosophy or just a concept but inline with this would be minimalism. Not the extreme of buying something that looks like a glorified shed and call it a house type, just to the point you maximize contentment.

    Seen too many people owned by their stuff. They're often fat, unhappy, stressed out, whatever and they buy more shit they really don't need and will waste more time and energy taking care of it instead of themselves. Hell, I make money off of them, so it's fine by me.

    [–]pollodustino 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    Jose Ortega y Gasset's Man Has No Nature. It's a short little essay, but quite appropriate to Red Pill ideals.

    [–]EseJandro 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    Whoever smelt it, dealt it.

    [–]JonyDrama 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    Aristotle was great (empiricism), he questioned Plato's forms theory, which in turn made Plato question his life's work. Keep in mind they both studied metaphysics, epistemology imo is more interesting and RP related.

    Some others which may pique your interest are; Hobbe's Leviathan (humans are entirely selfish and only live together thanks to states), Cogito Ergo Sum (I think, therefore I am), Spinoza's Ethics (he didn't believe in doing the right thing, God is in charge of everything), Voltaire's Skepticism (he found absurdity in the fact that scientific facts are often disproven/altered shortly after discovery), Hume's Rational Beliefs (see Hume's Fork), Ernst Mach's Logical Positivism (you can't gain knowledge without senses), and finally the one that made me think the most is Herbet Marcuse's take on human rationality.

    I highly recommend dabbling in all of the above, the thing with philosophy is even if you don't agree with the idea(s) presented, the idea will still slightly shift your paradigm of the world/universe.

    [–]Yashugan00 0 points1 point  (2 children)

    What's with this whole 'black pill' thing?

    I first heard about it on Blue Pill of all places (because I like to see them get their panties in a twist). And see what variety of misogynist/supremacy/hate group they call us today (bunch of fear mongers).

    It looks like it is more of a systematization of gender reality:

    It echo's to me as an autistic (not derogatory) 'making sense of the world' kind of thing, taking emotion and approaching women out of the equation (like what sandman does in his videos). An amalgamation of Red Pill Theory and MGTOWs don't deal with women. Very much blame women and then do nothing about it (or that direction hasn't developed yet?)

    Mind you reading some sites, they don't like red pill (?) but based on very inaccurate views, going so far as to use strawman arguments...

    [–]FallacyExplnationBot 2 points3 points  (1 child)

    Hi! Here's a summary of what a "Strawman" is:

    A straw man is logical fallacy that occurs when a debater intentionally misrepresents their opponent's argument as a weaker version and rebuts that weak & fake version rather than their opponent's genuine argument. Intentional strawmanning usually has the goal of [1] avoiding real debate against their opponent's real argument, because the misrepresenter risks losing in a fair debate, or [2] making the opponent's position appear ridiculous and thus win over bystanders.

    Unintentional misrepresentations are also possible, but in this case, the misrepresenter would only be guilty of simple ignorance. While their argument would still be fallacious, they can be at least excused of malice.

    [–]Yashugan00 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    Example straw-man: "They [/Red Pill] believe that using game and the paleo diet they can expel feminism from their lives. "

    I haven't seen the paleo diet pushed here.. nor that red pill goal is to 'end feminism', due to the TRP stance on no activism. (leave it to the MRA's)

    don't want to derail this tread so i'll leave it here while were still debating general 'merit' of philosophies.

    [–]Certifiedfamilylaw 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    I'm late to the party, however I haven't seen Wittgenstein mentioned. He's difficult for an amateur but is arguably one of the most influential philosophers

    [–]TeacSubpageIndex 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    Always been into Michel de Montaigne.

    [–]Stankin_Jankins 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    Stoicism. Read Letter from a Stoic by Seneca. Also there's On the Shortness of Life.

    [–]RPAlternate42 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    Objectivism is pretty well-aligned with those who use RedPill praxeology. I've gotten flak for saying this, but read this article which is basically a primer for Objectivism and judge for yourself.

    While Objectivists would like to say that objectivism is neither liberal nor conservative, Objectivism tends towards the conservative end of the spectrum and is most aligned with libertarianism under political scrutiny.

    Read the article and think about how the different political camps think and how some Red Pill theory posts align:

    I'll give you some examples to kick-start your critical thinking:

    1. How does the idea of welfare align with objectivism?
    2. Does a "spiritual life" help or hinder one, according to objectivism?
    3. How does the concept of AF/BB make you consider objectivism as it relates to Red Pill?

    You don't have to think to deeply here: consider a girl who said she likes the nice guy and then wipes Chad's cum off her face every Saturday night even though he doesn't ever talk to her. Is her claim of "I just want a nice guy..." align with the reality that she is presenting you?

    We say "Lift" because you'll figure it out. And then you do understand when a girl who has friendzoned you sees you after months of dedication says, "I liked you the way you were" but also can't keep her hands off of you? There is Objectivism in a study of this behavior.

    Read, well, all of Ayn Rand's work. The "Fountainhead" and "Atlas Shrugged" are the two big ones. Very surprisingly Ayn Rand is a woman. Without that knowledge one would assume she were a man based on the writing style and content.

    [–]Zenonlite 0 points1 point  (0 children)


    [–]JackGetsIt 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    Well first and foremost zen Buddhism but that's been mentioned already.

    The philosophy behind the transcendentalists I think jives up a bit. Especially as outlined in Emerson's essay Compensation.

    I'd also say the other philosophy not mentioned in the thread so far would be Japanese bushido as expressed in the writings Tsunetomo Yamamoto in his collection, Hagakure

    Finally the philosophy behind winning coaches like Lombardo and Cerutty are certainly in line with stoicism and redpill. I'd highly recommend this incredibly underrated book on great philosopher coaches (ignore the shitty cover).

    [–]johnsonsson 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    nietzsches "will to power"

    [–]Domic462 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    Read a book calles the Undeafeatable Mind.(Buddhist ish) It changed my life..

    Also look into the concept of self leadership

    [–]epistemic_humility 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    To refine your philosophy it's necessary to just understand philosophy and the origins of things. For that kind of education.

    I'd recommend reading bertrand Russell's history of Western philosophy, then read meditations by Marcus Aurelius, maybe the philosophy of history by hegel then look into sources of self by Charles Taylor.

    [–][deleted] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

    Samatha and vipassana, all philosophy is mental masturbation