For example, our understanding of the natural world is built upon a certain objective understanding of day-to-day physics and biology. By the fluke of evolution or what not, humans also seem share an objective common sense. That is the basis of some of corrupt's premises. For example, we agree that egalitarianism is illogical. One can argue that if everyone objectively and logically considered egalitarianism, its implications, and consequences, they would essentially reach the same "common sense" conclusion.

Also, the search for an absolute, objective truth, even if never found, is the basis and subconscious reason of human intellectual activity. The world is in a constant state of flux, but at the root of all this are things eternal. Matter and time are eternal.

Also, I should point out that anyone who thinks deeply and sets himself to it can be a philosopher. Academic philosophy is often nonsense and convoluted. It lacks the depth and profundity of spontaneous philosophy. You spoke of the Daodejing (Tao Te Ching); verily, the concept of wu-wei is this: that people can naturally come up with the right things, and thinking too much will not help.

Also being a Nietzschian, would you not say that the spirit of Dionysus is totally opposed to the academic spirit? People such as Socrates who walked around questioning people were not academics. They were much more profound than most academics are today and the ancients grasped the essence of life much better then the professors. Alan Bloom speaks about these things in "The Closing of the American Mind." As an add on, I'd say that mysticism is the direct consequence of a love for the world, because at the root of mysticism is a deep awe and reverence for our existence and world. It is not life denying.

Now I think Nietzsche was brilliant and that his diagnoses of many problems were spot on. But his solutions are a different matter. My specialty is actually "Eastern Philosophy" (I dislike that umbrella term too) more than Western Philosophy but generally, to paraphrase Erich Fromm, Eastern philosophy is much more "self-cultivation" action oriented while Western philosophy is much more thought oriented, with its ultimate cumulation in post-modernism which is totally socially useless. Nietzsche and Schopenhauer... perhaps reading the Bhagavad Gita one can come to grasps with this world by I no nobody who even sought solace to live a more socially productive life through Nietzsche.

I would recommend You to read these three thinkers (along with Nietzsche, of course) for a further and deeper understanding of what the real (non-academic) philosophy is:

Dostoevsky: http://www.online-literature.com/dostoevsky/notes_underground/
Shestov: http://shestov.by.ru/
Cioran: http://www.cioran.eu/

I hope You've already red Pascal, Kierkegaard and Camus, so... : )

-S. Kateliev (Bulgaria)-

I studied philosophy at the university a couple of years, and I have continued studying on my own since then. When I look back I think the realization that I actually didn´t know anything cleared my mind and helped me discover things I wouldn´t have discovered otherwise. I´m almost twice your age now and I still dont know anything, if knowing means certainty. But somehow that uncertainty is also an openness to the world that i feel is enriching and good. I don´t think I would have arrived at it without "wasting" a lot of time studying philosophy and practicing eastern methods of spirituality.

Edit:

One more thing: I think the truth is the only thing worth seeking. But I´m usually skeptical if somebody claims they have found it. (I´m thinking about the great questions now)

"Seeking objective truth is a variation of the fantasy"

If it were not for those objective truth seekers you would still be living in caves, the seekers of "pure" truth have done more to advance the human race, then most people ever will.

James Clerk Maxwell (13 June 1831 – 5 November 1879) was a Scottish theoretical physicist and mathematician. His most important achievement was classical electromagnetic theory, synthesizing all previously unrelated observations, experiments and equations of electricity, magnetism and even optics into a consistent theory.[1] His set of equations—Maxwell's equations—demonstrated that electricity, magnetism and even light are all manifestations of the same phenomenon: the electromagnetic field.

If it wasn't for people like this, the technology we enjoy would not be possible, it is because we believe the universe is understandable and graspable that we have advanced.

In other words, even those philosophers are admittedly wrong and don't know what they're talking about, so why masturbate about them so much? Do you really need someone to tell you "everyone knows nothing, even you" meanwhile they would know nothing themselves? I've been meaning to ask you these contradictory questions since you began posting here, granted your posts are refreshing (by refreshing I mean you aren't telling us to listen to crappy pop music or wear womens clothes and buy canned food) but i can't get around the philosophical contradictions behind each of your posts. maybe it's because i've never studied philosophy? but i don't think it takes dedicated study to see the contradictions. I don't know how to elaborate, as it would require me to make reference to earlier posts, but I'm a busy person :P