Philosophy refers to the study of universal and local problems such as existence, reason, knowledge, values, mind, and language. Issues of such kind are frequently offered as problems to be investigated or handled. Some sources suggest Pythagoras (c. 570 – c. 495 BCE) originated the name; others reject this assertion, claiming Pythagoreans just claimed usage of a preexisting term. Questioning, critical discussion, logical argument, and methodical exposition are all examples of philosophical approaches.

Historically, humanity has used philosophy to describe all fields of knowledge, and a philosopher was someone who practised it. "natural philosophy" covered astronomy, medicine, and physics from the time of Ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle through the nineteenth century. Newton's Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy, published in 1687, was eventually categorised as a physics book. Academic philosophy and other subjects became more professionalised and specialised as contemporary research universities grew in the nineteenth century. Since then, social sciences such as psychology, sociology, linguistics, and economics, which were once considered part of philosophy, have become independent academic specialities.

Metaphysics is a subfield of academic philosophy that studies the fundamental nature of existence and reality. Epistemology is another important subfield that practices the nature of knowledge and belief, ethics, moral values and logic. Both subfields involve the rules of inference that allow one to derive conclusions from true premises. Philosophy of science, political philosophy, aesthetics, language, and philosophy of mind are a few more well-known subfields.

The ten philosophies that I will be discussing:

1. Authoritarianism

2. Communism

3. Free Will

4. Hedonism

5. Idealism

6. Materialism

7. Transcendentalism

8. Stoicism

9. Objectivism

10. Nihilism

The rejection of political pluralism, iron-fisted central power to maintain the political status quo, and reductions in the rule of law, separation of powers, and democratic voting characterize authoritarianism. Political Scientists have developed many typologies of authoritarian systems of administration. Authoritarian regimes can be autocratic or oligarchic in character, and party or military authority usually found them.

Juan Linz, a political scientist, characterised authoritarianism as having four characteristics in a seminal paper published in 1964.

1. Political pluralism is limited, with legislative, political, and interest group limits.

2. Political legitimacy stands on emotional appeals and the image of the central power as a necessary evil in the face of "easily recognisable societal problems, such as underdevelopment or insurgency."

3. The central power suppresses anti-regime actions, and political mobilisation is minimal.

4. Ill-defined executive authorities, often ambiguous and fluctuating, extend the dictator's control.

An authoritarian government lacks free and competitive direct legislative elections, along with unconfined and competitive direct or indirect executive referendums, or both. Authoritarian states, broadly defined, lack civil rights such as freedom of religion or those in which the government and opposition do not alternate power at least once after free elections. Authoritarian nations may include ostensibly democratic institutions such as political parties, legislatures, and elections, but these institutions use unethical methods to maintain authority and include rigged or non-competitive elections. Since 1946, the proportion of authoritarian regimes in the worldwide political system has risen until the mid-1970s, then fell until 2000.

Moving forward, we will be discussing one of the most infamous dictators of the twentieth century:

Vladimir Lenin's radicalisation:

Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov, better known by his pseudonym Lenin, was a Russian revolutionary, politician, and political theorist who lived from April 22, 1870, to January 21, 1924. From 1917 to 1924, he was the first and only head of government of Soviet Russia, and from 1922 to 1924, he was the first and only head of government of the Soviet Union. Russia, and eventually the Soviet Union, became a one-party socialist state ruled by the Soviet Communist Party under his presidency. He was a Marxist who created his subgroup of Marxism known as Leninism.

Lenin, born into an upper-middle-class family in Simbirsk, adopted revolutionary socialist ideology in 1887. His radicalisation was a consequence of his brother's execution at the hands of the Tsarist regime. After being expelled from Kazan Imperial University for engaging in anti-Tsarist government rallies, he pursued a legal degree for the next few years. In 1893, Lenin relocated to Saint Petersburg and became a prominent Marxist activist. He was jailed for sedition in 1897 and banished for three years to Shushenskoye, where he married Nadezhda Krupskaya. He migrated to Western Europe after his exile, where he rose to prominence as a thinker in the Marxist Russian Social Democratic Labour Party. He was a significant figure in the RSDLP's ideological split in 1903, leading the Bolsheviks against Julius Martov's Mensheviks.

The Left Socialist Revolutionaries, elected soviets, and a multi-party Constituent Assembly first shared power with Lenin's Bolshevik administration, but by 1918, it had centralised authority in the new Communist Party. The land was dispersed to the farmers, while banks and large-scale industries became nationalised during Lenin's government. It walked away from the First World War by signing a pact relinquishing land to the Central Powers and preached world revolution. During the Red Terror, a violent campaign directed by the state security forces, Lenin crushed his opponents; tens of thousands were executed or incarcerated in concentration camps. In the Russian Civil War, which lasted from 1917 to 1922, his government defeated both right and left-wing anti-Bolshevik troops and handled the Polish-Soviet War, which lasted from 1919 to 1921.

Why do people become authoritarian?

I believe that there is usually a chain of events that leads one to start to follow authoritarianism. People who wish to gain immeasurable power over a region get their thirst for power from childhood experiences. If we take Lenin's example, he was 17 when his brother was executed, and there was nothing he could do against the powerful Tsarist regime. At that very moment, Lenin was powerless. This largely contributed to his goal of overthrowing the current regime and taking over. People who support authority but do not want it for themselves have different reasons. Based on the research regarding authoritarianism shown above, it would be safe to assume that authoritarians genuinely believe liberty is bad. If we consider authoritarians during Lenin's regime, these are people who have experienced the consequences of a lack of true authority. The first world war, rampant crime, and a relatively spineless Tsarist regime that lost to Lenin. It would be understandable for such people to look for a true figure of Authority. Someone who actually tries to bring order to the chaotic world. This is not only limited to Lenin's time. People across history have sought order amongst the chaos in the world, and some have looked towards a person with authority; someone that can protect them and maintain harmony.

Communism is a philosophical, social, political, and economic ideology and movement aimed at establishing a communist society, or socioeconomic system, based on the ideas of common ownership of means of production, the absence of social classes, money, and the state. Communism differs from other types of socialism. Communists believe the state should be abolished, but they disagree on how to accomplish this. A more libertarian approach to communization, revolutionary spontaneity and worker self-management contrasts with a more vanguardist or Communist party-driven strategy to establishing a constitutionally socialist state.

Various kinds of communism have evolved throughout history, including anarcho-communism and Marxist schools of thought. Marxism, Leninism, and libertarian communism, as well as the political ideologies grouped around them, are all schools of thought that share the analysis that the current order of society stems from capitalism, its economic system, and mode of production, namely that there are two major social classes in this system, their relationship is exploitative, and that this situation can only end in revolution. The two classes are the proletariat (working class), who make up the majority of society's population and must work to survive, and the bourgeoisie (capitalist class), a small minority who profit from employing the working class by owning the means of production. According to this idea, the revolution would strengthen the working class by establishing social ownership of the means of production, the first step toward changing society into a communist mode of production.

Throughout the twentieth century, communist regimes based on Marxism–Leninism and its variants rose to power in various parts of the globe, first in the Soviet Union after the 1917 Russian Revolution, and then in parts of Eastern Europe, Asia, and a few other locations after World War II. By the 1920s, communism had overtaken social democracy as the most powerful political force in the global socialist movement. There are two types of communist criticism: that which deals with the practical reality of communist countries in the twentieth century, and that which deals with communist principles and theory. Several academics and economists, for example, argue that the Soviet model, under which these nominally Communist states in practice operated, was a form of state capitalism, or a non-planned administrative-command system, rather than a true communist economic model as defined by most accepted definitions of communism as an economic theory.

Moving forward, we will be discussing the biggest pioneer of Communism:

Karl Marx's Critique of the Capitalist World

Karl Heinrich Marx was a German philosopher, economist, historian, sociologist, political theorist, journalist, and socialist revolutionary who lived from 1818 to 1883. The Communist Manifesto (1848) and the three-volume Das Kapital (1867–1883) are two of his most well-known works. Marx's political and philosophical views shaped later intellectual, economic, and political history significantly. His name has been used as a noun, adjective, and the name of a social philosophy school.

Marx's views on labour and its role in capital reproduction were linked with his emphasis on social interactions in defining the past, present, and future of society. Labour is required for capital to exist and accumulate, and both of these factors have an influence on social structure. According to Marx, social progress is fueled by the conflict between conflicting interests or parties positioned in the historical context of their method of production. This became a source of inspiration for the conflict theory corpus. He claimed that human history began with free, productive, and creative activities that became compelled and dehumanised throughout time, a tendency that was most visible under capitalism, in his evolutionary model of history.

The alienation would disappear in the new communist society Marx envisioned, and persons would be free to act without being tied by the sale of their labour. It would be a democratic society in which the whole people would be enfranchised. In such a utopian environment, there would be no need for a state whose former objective was to impose estrangement. Between capitalism and the formation of a socialist/communist regime, Marx theorised, there would be a time of proletarian dictatorship, in which the working class controls political power and forcefully socialises the means of production. "Between capitalism and communist society lies the era of a revolutionary transformation of the one into the other," he said in his Critique of the Gotha Program.

Why Do People Become Communist?

I believe that people who believe in and embrace communism are people who sympathise with the working class and believe in a utopia where everyone can live life in the same, comfortable manner. Many people that go against communism believe that it is an ideology that could benefit everybody but could never work in practice. The rebuttal that communists respond with to this argument is that this is the case because people in power are not ready to pay higher taxes for a better world. Communists believe that a value of a person does not lie in their productivity, but in the fact that they are human beings. In my opinion, the reasons for someone choosing to become a communist are different depending on whether the person is upper class or working class. Working-class communists are communists because they see the system they are born into as a society with a lack of opportunity for them to try. They have to work multiple jobs to provide for their families and are unable to acquire the diverse skillset that a good education gives them because they are not able to receive said education due to the lack of money when they were born. In a capitalist society, they struggle with their healthcare expenses too, since they have to pay for insurance too. The wages they receive are simply not enough for them to feed their families, pay for their kids' education, and be able to pay for healthcare or life insurance. They are in turn forced to take loans, which benefits the corporations that are the cause behind their lack of free healthcare and education in the first place. It is perfectly understandable for them to want to believe in an ideology that at least promises a comfortable life.

The reason behind a rich person believing in communism could be either sympathy or a thirst for power. They could be truly sympathetic towards the working class and try their best to provide them with jobs that provide a living wage. It is also possible that their only goal is to increase profits which they can do by employing working-class individuals and promising them a better wage. This means that they would have an abundance of labour to exploit, but due to the higher profits that come with more labour, they are able to pay their workers a living wage. While this does benefit the workers too, the belief in the working class is a facade hiding their true intentions.

The ability of agents to freely select between several viable courses of action is known as free will.

Moral responsibility, praise, humiliation, sin, and other judgements that only apply to freely chosen behaviours are all linked to the concept of free will. It is related to the notions of advice, persuasion, dialogue, and prohibition. Only free-willed behaviours are perceived to be deserving of praise or condemnation. Whether free will exists and what it is are some of the most considerable philosophical debates. Some people describe free will as taking action without being influenced or motivated by other forces.

Some people believe that free will is decisions not influenced by previous occurrences. Determinism implies only one conceivable outcome exists, which is incompatible with a libertarian view of free choice. This dilemma was prominent in ancient Greek philosophy, and it continues to be a noticeable topic of philosophical dispute today. Incompatibilism is a philosophical position that sees free will as incompatible with determinism. It includes metaphysical libertarianism (the notion that determinism is untrue and hence free will is feasible) and hard determinism (the claim that determinism is true and thus free will is not possible).

Compatibilists believe that free will and determinism are compatible. Some compatibilists believe that determinism is required for free will, claiming that choice entails one course of action over another, which necessitates an understanding of what choices result in. Compatibilists see the free will vs determinism discussions between libertarians and hard determinists as an unnecessary dilemma. Different compatibilists define "free will" differently and find various limitations important to the problem. Classical compatibilists saw free will as nothing more than freedom of action, deeming someone free of will if had they counterfactually desired to do anything else, they could have done so without physical hindrance. Free will, according to contemporary compatibilists, is a psychological capacity, such as the ability to direct one's behaviour in a way that is responsive to reason, and there are still more different conceptions of free will, each with its own set of concerns, all of which share the common feature of not seeing the possibility of determinism as a threat to the possibility of free will.

Aristotle's Take On Free Will

Aristotle (384–322 BC) was a Greek philosopher and polymath who lived during the Classical period in Ancient Greece. Plato trained him, and the Lyceum, the Peripatetic school of thinking, and the Aristotelian legacy were his creations. His publications are mainly on physics, biology, zoology, metaphysics, logic, ethics, aesthetics, poetry, theatre, music, rhetoric, psychology, linguistics, economics, politics, meteorology, geology, and government. Aristotle offered a convoluted synthesis of previously existent concepts. His teachings provided the West with several ideas, concerns and research methods. As a result, his philosophy has influenced almost every facet of Western knowledge, and it is still a source of philosophical dispute today.

While Aristotle shares Plato's concern with virtue cultivation, he devotes more theoretical emphasis to the role of choice in commencing individual behaviours that, over time, become habits, for better or worse. Aristotle claims in Book III of the Nicomachean Ethics that, unlike non-rational beings, we can do or not do things, and that much of what we do is voluntary, meaning that it has its genesis in ourselves and that we are "conscious of the particular conditions of the action." Furthermore, adult people make decisions based on logical rules of action after reflecting on many possible approaches to our goals. Choose consistently wisely, and a virtuous character will grow over time, and it is in our ability to be righteous or vicious.

The question of whether an individual's internal state determines his decision—perception of his circumstances and applicable beliefs, needs, and general character dispositions—or external conditions appears to be acknowledged by Aristotle, but it does not adequately resolve. "As a father of children, the man is the parent of his deeds," he continues, meaning that a person's character determines how she acts. One could worry that this indicates that the person couldn't have chosen any other way since she doesn't have control over her existing character at the moment of choosing, and hence she isn't responsible for her decisions. Aristotle responds by stating that her previous choices influence her current personality.

Why Do People Believe In Free Will?

I believe that people believe in free will mostly because they themselves have experienced the feeling of being able to make a choice without any external influences, or at least they believe they have experienced this feeling. A lot of the decisions we make in our daily lives is influenced by people. Whether that is bunking a lesson at school, or finishing all of your homework. If a student decides to bunk a lesson, it is very commonly out of peer pressure. If it is a group bunk, even the student who initiated the bunk feels the pressure to continue to be mischievous since that is the persona that they have carried for a long time or something that they need to do to impress their classmates. People who believe in the existence of absolute free will, in my opinion, truly believe that they carry free will, and so should everyone else. What is interesting is that they might not be saying the truth. While it is possible that they have made choices out of complete free will, we can never know this. This is why there is no way to invalidate either party's beliefs. It could perfectly be true that the believers have made choices out of free will, and it is possible that they believe that have but they truly have not. In brief, people usually believe in free will because they think they have made choices out of their own free will.

Hedonism is a term that refers to a group of philosophies that all contain pleasure as a primary theme. Human conduct is governed by wants to maximise pleasure and minimise suffering, according to psychological or motivational hedonism. Normative or ethical hedonism, on the other hand, is concerned with how we should act rather than how we do: we should seek pleasure while avoiding pain. The idea that only pleasure has inherent worth is known as axiological hedonism, frequently lumped together with ethical hedonism. It is the idea that pleasure and pain are the only components of well-being when applied to well-being or someone's benefit. These philosophical definitions of hedonism, considered acceptable schools of thought, must be contrasted from how the term is used in ordinary parlance, referred to as "folk hedonism." It has a negative meaning in this sense since it is associated with the egoistic pursuit of instant gratification through indulging in sensory pleasures without concern for the consequences.

Aristippus's Pleasure filled endeavours

Aristippus of Cyrene (c. 435 – c. 356 BCE), the founder of the Cyrenaic school of thought, was a hedonistic Greek philosopher. He was a student of Socrates, but he taught that life aimed to find joy by adapting circumstances to oneself and retaining adequate control over adversity and wealth. Aristippus coined "ethical hedonism" to describe his belief that pleasure is the sole good. He was one of the first known pioneers of Hedonism. Even though he had two boys, Aristippus considered his daughter Arete the "intellectual heiress" of his work.

Aristippus' ethics, like those of other Greek ethical theorists, is based on the question of what the 'end' is; that is, what objective our activities are aimed at and what is desirable in and of itself. The aim, according to Aristippus, is pleasure. Aristippus is a hedonist because he sees pleasure as the goal. Most of Aristippus' joys are associated with sensuous enjoyment, such as sleeping with courtesans and savouring excellent meals and aged wines.

Aristippus, according to Xenophon, a hostile contemporary of Aristippus', refused to wait for any enjoyment. Aristippus recommended just enjoying whatever is in front of one's eyes, rather than causing hardship for oneself by toiling to get things that could offer one pleasure in the future.

The Cyrenaics elaborated on both of these aspects of Aristippus' thinking.

Why Do People Believe In Hedonism?

Hedonists are people who believe that the ultimate goal of life is pleasure and that they should try and maximise it. The question is, why do they require only pleasure? If I had to go with one reason, I think it would be extremely high levels of stress. More specifically, when a person is going through extreme levels of stress in their personal or professional lives, many reach a breaking point where they are unable to take high levels of stress anymore. They decide to reduce the importance of their professional lives and focus more on participating in activities that give them pleasure. Hanging out with their friends, going out to eat, playing video games, playing sports, all at a much higher rate than they used to prior to said breaking point. Their professional work is prioritised less and done solely when absolutely necessary. Many hedonists also choose to find the most pleasuring components of the stressful activities in their daily activities and try to maximise these components. Whether that is cooperating with your co-workers, taking part in research for the company and increasing their participation in departments that they are interested in. This helps them enjoy work instead of reducing the amount of work which means they can maintain the same income and relation with their company. If the person in either of these situations manages to find solace, then hedonism is not as big of a disadvantage as it is made out to be in modern society.

The word idealism is used in philosophy to identify and explain metaphysical positions that say reality is indistinguishable and inseparable from human sight and knowledge; reality is a mental construct intimately linked to ideas. Objective idealism proposes the existence of an objective consciousness that exists before and independently of human perception, thus the object is independent of human perception. Subjective idealism proposes that a material object exists only to the extent that a human perceives it, and objective idealism proposes the existence of an objective consciousness that exists before and independently of human perception, which means the object is independent of human perception.

The essence of an item, as per philosopher George Berkeley is perception. Immanuel Kant, on the other hand, said that idealism "does not concern the reality of things," but that our "modes of representation" of things like space and time are "essential aspects of the human mind," rather than "determinations that pertain to things in themselves." Kant contends that the objects of experience rely on their presence in the human mind that sees them and that the essence of the thing-in-itself is external to human experience. Humans cannot comprehend them without categories, which provide structure to our perception of reality.

On a philosophical level, idealism pairs with scepticism about the possibility of knowing anything other than the human mind's existence. As a result, ontological idealism rejects physicalism and dualism as beliefs that do not grant the human intellect ontological primacy. In contrast to materialism, idealists believe that consciousness is the source and prerequisite of all events. Idealists believe that awareness is the origin of material reality.

The first arguments that the world of experience begins in the mind's sense of the physical world are the works of Indian and Greek thinkers. Panentheistic reasoning for the presence of an all-pervading awareness as the true nature, as the true root of reality, were offered by Hindu idealism and Greek Neoplatonism. The Yogacara school, which originated within Mahayana Buddhism in India in the 4th century AD, based its "mind-only" idealism on phenomenological assessments of personal experience to a large extent. This shift toward the subjective foreshadowed empiricists like George Berkeley, who used sceptical arguments against materialism to resurrect idealism in 18th-century Europe. German idealists like Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, Johann Gottlieb Fichte, Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph Schelling, and Arthur Schopenhauer dominated 19th-century philosophy, beginning with Immanuel Kant. From British idealism through phenomenalism to existentialism, this tradition, which stressed the mental or "ideal" quality of all occurrences, gave rise to idealistic and subjectivist schools.

At the start of the twentieth century, The western world heavily criticised idealism. G. E. Moore and Bertrand Russell were significant critics of epistemological and ontological idealism, and the new realists were also critics. According to the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Moore and Russell's criticisms were so powerful that "any acknowledgement of idealistic inclinations is treated in the English-speaking world with reluctance" even more than a century later. Many characteristics of idealism, however, had an impact on subsequent philosophy. Phenomenology, a popular branch of philosophy since the late twentieth century, relies on the teachings of idealism too.

George Berkeley's Immaterialism

George Berkeley (12 March 1685 – 14 January 1753), also known as Bishop Berkeley (Bishop of Cloyne of the Anglican Church of Ireland), was an Anglo-Irish philosopher best known for advancing the doctrine of "immaterialism" (later referred to as "subjective idealism" by others). This theory claims that well-known items such as tables and chairs are thoughts seen by the minds and, as a result, cannot exist without being perceived. Berkeley is also known for his critique of abstraction, which is a necessary premise in his immaterialism thesis.

The assumption that "sensible things are those only which are immediately perceived by sense." led to George Berkeley's theory that matter does not exist. "The ideas of sense are stronger, livelier, and clearer than those of the imagination," Berkeley writes in The Principles of Human Knowledge. "They are also steady, orderly, and coherent." We can discern whether the things we're seeing are genuine or whether they're merely a dream based on this.

Perception is the source of all knowledge; what we perceive are ideas, not things in and of themselves; a thing in and of itself must be outside experience; thus, the world consists only of ideas and the minds that perceive those ideas; a thing only exists in the sense that it senses or is perceived. As a result, we can see that Berkeley believes consciousness exists because of its ability to perceive. "'To be,' said of the object, means to be perceived, 'esse est percipi'; 'to be', said of the subject, means to perceive or 'percipere'." Berkeley next criticises the "opinion strangely prevailing amongst men, that houses, mountains, rivers, and in a word all sensible objects have an existence natural or real, distinct from being perceived" after establishing this. Berkeley contends that this notion is incoherent since an item having an existence independent of experience must have both sensible attributes and therefore be known, as well as an insensible actuality, which he feels is incoherent. The fallacy, according to Berkeley, develops when individuals assume that senses may indicate or infer anything about the material object. This concept is what Berkeley refers to as "abstract ideas." He refutes this notion by claiming that humans cannot imagine an item without experiencing the thing's sensuous input. In Principles of Human Knowledge, he argues that, just as individuals can only perceive matter with their senses through actual sensation, they can only conceive of matter (or, more accurately, conceptions of matter) through the notion of sensation of matter. This hypothesis suggests that everything individuals can think of about matter is nothing more than ideas about matter. As a result, matter, if it exists, must exist as a collection of concepts that can be sensed and processed by the mind. However, since the matter is only a collection of thoughts, Berkeley concludes that matter, in the sense of a substantial substance, does not exist, contrary to what most philosophers at the time believed. Indeed, if a person visualises anything, it must have some colour, whether dark or bright; it cannot be a form with no shade.

Why Do People Believe In Idealism?

I believe that people believe in Idealism so that they can minimise the pain they feel in real life and feel more confident in themselves and their abilities. Anybody would love to believe that every event taking place around them was taking place in their heads. Telling oneself that everything they see, hear, feel, smell, and taste was created within one's own head is a very ambitious idea. The idea that every single person you have ever known, every song you have ever listened to, every game you have ever played, every movie you have ever watched, every country, city, laws of physics, war, peace, religion, politics, history, all of it exists inside your head really makes you rethink your capabilities. Idealism basically tells you that everything that has ever existed exists in solely your mind, or, as more moderate versions preach, everything that you see is decided by your perception of every object and every detail. Telling yourself that your brain is capable of building an entire universe around you makes your regular tasks much smaller and simpler in perspective. It makes your brain comprehend these tasks in an easier manner and so the level of stress you experience reduces.

Materialism is a philosophical monism that maintains that matter is nature's underlying substance and that all things, including mental states and awareness, are the product of material interactions. Mind and consciousness, according to philosophical materialism, are by-products or epiphenomena of material processes (such as the biochemistry of the human brain and nervous system) and therefore cannot exist without them. This phenomenon contrasts sharply with idealism, in which mind and awareness are first-order realities to which matter is subordinate and material interactions are incidental.

Physicalism, the belief that everything is essentially physical, is closely connected to materialism. Philosophical physicalism has progressed from materialism with physical science ideas to include more complex conceptions of physicality than just ordinary matter (e.g. spacetime, physical energies and forces, and dark matter). As a result, some people prefer physicalism over materialism, while others use the terms interchangeably.

Idealism, pluralism, dualism, panpsychism, and other types of monism are all antithetical to materialism or physicalism.

Walking Stewart and His Materialistic pantheism

John "Walking" Stewart was an English philosopher and wanderer who lived from February 19, 1747, to February 20, 1822. Stewart devised a unique materialistic pantheism framework.

He constructed a unique school of materialist philosophy throughout his travels, combining Spinozistic pantheism with yogic conceptions. Stewart began publicising his views in 1790 when his writings Travel through the most fascinating portions of the Globe and, The Apocalypse of Nature launched in two volumes (London, 1790).

"Stewart expounds what might be described as a panbiomorphic universe (it deserves an entirely new term just for itself), in which human identity is no different in category from a wave, flame, or wind, having an entirely modal existence." historian David Fairer wrote.

Why Do People Believe In Materialism?

I believe that the belief in Materialism exists due to atheism. People who believe that there are no supernatural forces controlling anything and that nothing that goes on in the world is inside anyone's heads would obviously believe that everything in existence is made of matter(atoms and molecules). Everything existing as only matter helps ground one's beliefs it brings in some humility and makes them understand that they are not important in the grand scheme of things. After all, a human is merely a speck of dust compared to the earth, and the earth is a speck of dust compared to our galaxy, and our galaxy is yet another speck of dust compared to the universe. Atheists are extreme realists who refuse to believe that the scale of the human mind or the power of belief is responsible for what we see in the universe. This is very understandable, and it is what I believe is the reason behind a common belief in materialism.

Transcendentalism is a philosophical movement that emerged in New England in the late 1820s and 1830s. The underlying goodness of individuals and nature is a crucial idea, and while society and its institutions have tainted self purity, people are at their best when they are really "self-reliant" and autonomous. Rather than believing in a distant heaven, transcendentalists regarded the heavenly experience as a part of everyday life. People saw physical and spiritual phenomena as part of dynamic processes rather than distinct entities by transcendentalists.

Subjective intuition takes precedence over objective empiricism in transcendentalism. Adherents think that people think of wholly new ideas while paying little heed to previous teachers. It was born out of a reaction to the prevailing condition of intellectualism and spirituality. The Unitarian church's doctrine was close to the syllabus at Harvard Divinity School.

Transcendentalism arose from "English and German Romanticism, the Biblical criticism of Johann Gottfried Herder and Friedrich Schleiermacher, the scepticism of David Hume" and Immanuel Kant's transcendental philosophy and German Idealism. Emanuel Swedenborg and Jakob Böhme are prevalent influences on transcendentalism, according to Perry Miller and Arthur Versluis. Hindu works on mental philosophy and spirituality, particularly the Upanishads, had a big effect on it.

Ralph Waldo Emerson's Work In Transcendentalism

Emerson met with Frederic Henry Hedge, George Putnam, and George Ripley on September 8, 1836, the day before the publication of Nature, to organise monthly reunions of other like-minded thinkers. The Transcendental Club, which functioned as the movement's focal point, was founded around this time. On September 19, 1836, it conducted its first formal meeting. For the first time, women attended a Transcendental Club meeting on September 1, 1837. To guarantee that Margaret Fuller, Elizabeth Hoar, and Sarah Ripley would be there for the evening get-together, Emerson asked them to supper at his house before the gathering. Fuller would go on to become a pivotal figure in the transcendental movement.

On September 9, 1836, Emerson anonymously published his first essay, "Nature" On August 31, 1837, he gave his now-famous Phi Beta Kappa address, "The American Scholar", which was at first titled "An Oration, Delivered before the Phi Beta Kappa Society at Cambridge" before being renamed for a collection of essays (which included the first general publication of "Nature") in 1849. Friends persuaded him to publish the lecture, which he did on his own in a 500-copy edition that sold out in a month. Emerson declared literary independence for the United States in his address, urging Americans to develop their writing style separate from Europe.

Emerson befriended Henry David Thoreau in 1837. "Do you keep a journal?" Emerson asked Thoreau in 1837, even though they had likely met as early as 1835. The question inspired Thoreau for the rest of his life. Between 1960 and 1982, the canonical Harvard University Press version of Emerson's journal was produced in 16 detailed volumes. According to some experts, the journal is Emerson's most revered literary achievement.

Emerson delivered a series of lectures on the philosophy of history at the Masonic Temple in Boston in March 1837. This month was the first time he was in charge of a lecture series on his own, making it the start of his lecturing career. The revenues from this series of lectures were far more than when he was paid to speak by an organisation, and he proceeded to organise his talks often throughout his life. He ultimately gave up to 80 lectures each year, going as far as St. Louis, Des Moines, Minneapolis, and California in the northern United States.

Why Do People Believe In Transcendentalism?

In my opinion, the people who believe in transcendentalism are people who are tired of the rat race. They are tired of constantly maintaining a good life, good relationships with everybody, an extremely consistent work ethic, and everything that constitutes a good life. They do not wish to wait to maybe go to heaven after their death to experience divinity. They wish to appreciate everything around them at a high level instead of focusing on long term goals that may never bring them the happiness they long for. Stopping on your way to work to appreciate the beautiful colours of a tree, taking the time to absorb all the noises, sights, and smells around you to appreciate existence and realise that your surroundings are the divine experience that you have been longing for are what Transcendentalism is all about. The people who are tired of the constant lack of sleep, constant arguments, work, and relationships are the ones who finally try and appreciate the miracle that is our very existence. This reliance on oneself is what Ralph Waldo Emerson and the Transcendental Club wished to educate the world about.

Stoicism is a Hellenistic philosophical school founded in Athens in the early third century BC by Zeno of Citium. It is a personal eudemonic virtue ethics philosophy inspired by its logic and perspectives on the natural world, arguing that virtue practise is essential and sufficient for achieving eudaimonia—flourishing via ethical living. The Stoics defined a life devoted to practising the cardinal virtues and living in harmony with nature as the way to eudaimonia.

The Stoics are famous for stating that "virtue is the only good" for humans, and those outward things like health, prosperity, and pleasure are neither good nor evil in and of themselves but do have worth as "material for virtue to act upon." The Stoic tradition, along with Aristotelian ethics, is one of the fundamental founding approaches of virtue ethics. The Stoics also thought that certain damaging emotions were rooted in erroneous judgement and that individuals should strive to have a will that is "in accordance with nature" As a result, the Stoics believed that the best indicator of a person's philosophy was how they behaved rather than what they said. Because they believed everything originated inside of nature, it was necessary to comprehend the norms of the natural order to have a decent life.

Many Stoics, such as Seneca and Epictetus, stressed that a sage would be emotionally robust to disaster since "virtue is sufficient for happiness" This belief is comparable to the meaning of the word "stoic calm", however, it excludes the conventional Stoic concept that only a sage is genuinely free and that all moral corruptions are equally wicked.

Emperor Marcus Aurelius was a follower of Stoicism, which flourished across the Roman and Greek world until the third century AD. After Christianity became the national religion in the 4th century AD, it began to wane. It has undergone revivals since then, most notably in the Renaissance (Neostoicism) and in the modern-day (modern Stoicism).

Seneca and His Roman Stoicism

Seneca, also known as Lucius Annaeus Seneca the Younger (c. 4 BC-AD 65), was a Roman Stoic philosopher, statesman, playwright, and, in one work, satirist, who lived during the post-Augustan period of Latin literature.

Seneca's lasting contribution to philosophy has been to the school of Stoicism, as "a major philosophical figure of the Roman Imperial Period" His work is very approachable, and it drew the attention of writers like Michel de Montaigne from the Renaissance forward. He has been called "the world's most interesting Stoic" and "a towering and controversial figure of antiquity."

Seneca produced many volumes on Stoicism, the most of which dealt with ethics, with one work (Naturales Quaestiones) to do with the physical universe. Seneca drew on the works of numerous earlier Stoics, citing Zeno, Cleanthes, and Chrysippus frequently, as well as Posidonius, with whom he shared a fascination with natural events. Epicurus is regularly quoted by him, notably in his Letters. Epicurus is primarily important to him since he may use him as a source of ethical maxims. Similarly, Seneca expresses an interest in Platonist philosophy but never commits to it. His moral writings are founded on Stoic principles. Many upper-class Romans found a guiding ethical foundation for political action in Stoicism, a prominent philosophy at the time.

Seneca emphasises that ethical theory and practical counsel are separate yet linked in his works. His Letters to Lucilius "represent a sort of philosophical testament for posterity" and demonstrate Seneca's quest for ethical perfection. Seneca sees philosophy as a salve for life's wounds. Anger and sadness, in particular, are poisonous impulses that must be uprooted or regulated according to reason. He feels it vital to confront one's mortality and prepare well to face death, and he explores the relative benefits of contemplative and busy lives. He writes on favours, mercy, the necessity of friendship, and the desire to assist others, and he encourages people to practise poverty and appropriately handle riches. A logical providence governs the cosmos for the best, and this must be reconciled with acceptance of misfortune.

Why Do People Believe In Stoicism?

From the definition of Stoicism as well as its spread and journey, I believe that the people who believe and follow Stoicism are people who have faced traumatic events and threats in the past. I am inferring this from not only the definition but from my personal experiences. Most of my friends and I usually react in an angry or sad way to anything that goes south. This has not been the case for some of my friends who have faced traumatic experiences such as the death of a family member, multiple horrific encounters with bullies, or have been in the presence of a traumatising event that happened to occur when they were around. Such people tend to stay calm in relatively smaller instances such as getting into trouble at school or when a debate about any topic gets heated. They have experienced much more and have gotten out of it in a stable state, so staying calm and thinking clearly is what will help them most in smaller situations. They believe that showing emotion in such situations is a sign of lack of experience in life, proved by the fact that they have been desensitised heavily towards trauma and so are almost incapable of displaying emotion in daily tense situations.

Ayn Rand, a Russian-American writer, founded Objectivism as a philosophical theory. Rand's Objectivism was originally represented in fiction, most notably in The Fountainhead (1943) and Atlas Shrugged (1957), and then in nonfiction articles and books. It was eventually formalised by Leonard Peikoff, a professional philosopher and Rand's chosen intellectual successor. "the concept of man as a heroic being, with his happiness as the moral purpose of his life, with productive achievement as his noblest activity, and reason as his only absolute" Rand said of Objectivism. Objectivism, according to Peikoff, is a "closed system" in the sense that its "fundamental principles" were established by Rand and are not open to modification. "new implications, applications and integrations can always be discovered" he said.

The main tenets of objectivism are that reality exists independently of consciousness, that human beings have direct contact with reality through sense perception (see direct and indirect realism), that objective knowledge can be gained from perception through the process of concept formation and inductive logic, that the proper moral purpose of one's life is the pursuit of one's happiness (see rational egoism), and that the only social system consistent with this morality is the market economy (see market economy).

Rand's philosophy has been disregarded or dismissed by academic philosophers. Objectivism has, nonetheless, had a substantial impact on libertarians and American conservatives. Rand's Objectivist movement aims to convey her views to the general public and use academic contexts.

Ayn Rand's Objectivism

Alice O'Connor (born Alisa Zinovyevna Rosenbaum on February 2, 1905, died March 6, 1982) was a Russian-born American writer and philosopher more known by her pen name Ayn Rand. She is noted for her writing and coining "Objectivism" to describe a philosophical system she created. She was born and raised in Russia before emigrating to the United States in 1926. In 1935, she authored a play that premiered on Broadway. After two early books that were unsuccessful at first, she rose to prominence with The Fountainhead, published in 1943. Rand's best-known work, Atlas Shrugged, was released in 1957. She then moved to non-fiction to promote her ideology, producing her publications and releasing various essays until she died in 1982.

Rand coined the term "Objectivism" to describe her philosophy, which she defined as "the concept of man as a heroic being, with his happiness as the moral purpose of his life, with productive achievement as his noblest activity, and reason as his only absolute" She saw Objectivism as a comprehensive philosophy with viewpoints on metaphysics, epistemology, ethics, political philosophy, and aesthetics.

Rand favoured philosophical realism in metaphysics and rejected whatever she considered mysticism or supernaturalism, including all kinds of religion. Rand opposed determinism and believed in free will as a type of agent causation.

Rand defined reason as "the faculty that identifies and integrates the material provided by man's senses" in epistemology, and she regarded all knowledge to be founded on sense perception, the validity of which she deemed axiomatic. "'Instinct,' 'intuition," revelation,' or 'simply knowing,'" Rand rejected any claims of non-perceptual or a priori knowledge. Rand developed a theory of idea creation in her Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology, rejecting the analytic-synthetic dichotomy.

Why Do People Believe In Objectivism?

The most likely reason behind people believing in Objectivism is that inside of most of us, there is a hunger and a want to achieve a goal that we believe will give us happiness. Achieving this goal is precisely want Rand wants all humans to do. The goal of objectivism is to work hard, be productive every day, and achieve the goals one has created for themselves. Making sure to reduce distractions, avoiding procrastination, and surrounding yourself with the "right" people that will help you on your way to success are all parts of objectivism. Most people in today's world, in fact, most people across history have had goals that they wanted to achieve, and they believe that these goals will give them happiness. It is because of this belief in their goals that people believe in Objectivism.

Nihilism is a philosophical school of thought that denies universal or primary aspects of human life, such as objective truth, knowledge, morality, values, and meaning. Human values are unfounded, life is worthless, knowledge is unattainable, or some group of phenomena does not exist or is useless or futile, according to different nihilist beliefs.

Nihilism is a historical idea that arose out of nominalism, scepticism, and philosophical pessimism, as well as potentially out of Christianity itself, according to nihilism scholars. Nietzsche's 'crisis of nihilism,' which arises with two major concepts: the annihilation of higher ideals and the resistance to life-affirmation, is mainly responsible for today's meaning. On the other hand, early versions of nihilism may have been more selective in certain hegemonies of social, moral, political, and aesthetic thought.

The phrase is frequently used interchangeably with anomie to describe a widespread sense of despair about the meaninglessness of life or the arbitrariness of human values and social systems. Nihilism has also been an important feature or component of several historical times. Postmodernity, for example, has been described as a nihilistic age or manner of thought by Jean Baudrillard and others. According to certain theologians and religious figures, postmodernity and many aspects of modernity signify nihilism by rejecting religious underpinnings. On the other hand, nihilism has been linked to religious and non-religious perspectives.

The word usually describes varieties of existential nihilism, which holds that life has no fundamental worth, meaning, or purpose. Other well-known nihilist positions include the rejection of all normative and ethical views (Moral nihilism), the rejection of all social and political institutions (Political nihilism), the belief that no knowledge can or does exist (Epistemological nihilism), and several metaphysical positions such as Metaphysical nihilism, Mereological nihilism, and even the belief that life itself does not exist.

Friedrick Nietzsche and Nihilism

Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche (15 October 1844 – 25 August 1900) was a German philosopher, cultural critic, and philologist whose work influenced modern intellectual history significantly. Before going to philosophy, he worked as a classical philologist. At the age of 24, Nietzsche became the youngest person to occupy the Chair of Classical Philology at the University of Basel. Due to health issues that plagued him for most of his life, Nietzsche quit in 1879; he finished much of his primary writing in the following decade. In 1889, at the age of 45, he had a nervous breakdown and lost all of his mental powers.

Friedrich Nietzsche is the philosopher most typically linked with nihilism. There is no objective order or structure in the universe, according to Nietzsche, save what we give it. The nihilist realises that all values are false and that reason is powerless after penetrating the facades that support convictions. "Every belief, every considering something true is necessarily false because there is simply no true world," Nietzsche argues. Nihilism, he believes, necessitates a fundamental rejection of all given values and meanings: "Nihilism is not only the belief that everything deserves to perish; it is also the act of ploughing; it is the act of destroying."

Nietzsche claims that nihilism's caustic intensity is total and that "the highest values devalue themselves" when subjected to it. The goal is missing, and the question 'Why?' is unanswered" (Will to Power). Nihilism will inevitably reveal all treasured ideas and sacred truths as symptoms of faulty Western mythology. This loss of meaning, significance, and purpose will be the most destructive force in history, a definitive attack on reality and nothing short of humanity's biggest catastrophe.

Why Do People Become Nihilists?

I believe that people who are tired of the way the current global system runs are the ones who believe that the religious values proposed by most of the population mean nothing. Modern Nihilism can be attributed largely to Punk culture. People who believe that the existence of a social hierarchy is damaging to society are usually the people who refuse to care about the significance of any of the values that this system attempts to preach. I believe that these are usually people who happen to live in poorer areas and so see themselves as the primary victims of corporate corruption and capitalism as a whole. This is the reason that they refuse to believe or refuse to value any goals or any ethics that religious organisations and corporations attempt to preach.