Existential Comics

SMBC did an even more accurate version but I didn't want to copy them too much.

"Oh yeah and another thing, not a big fan of the English language, or the lack of Trial by Combat in deciding our differences!"

The Once and Future King - Existential Comics

They ended up going with the guy who told them it was their moral obligation to make as much money as possible so they could give a bit back to charity after, for uh...altruism or something.

In The Conquest of Bread, Peter Kropotkin makes the argument that all technological progress more or less belongs to everyone.
We simply find ourselves existing in the modern world that inherits the efforts of billions of people to make it livable for us, spanning tens of thousands of years. The very land we live on has been cultivated by our ancestors to make it suitable to farming. Technology created in the past is handed to us to work this land. The crops we grow have been selectively bred for thousands of years to feed us. Animals like sheep and cows exist, which are nothing like their natural selves, having their DNA altered by the long slow efforts of our fore bearers. All this work belongs to all of us, but often the capitalist comes in at the last moment to buy the land, buy the animals, and patent the last 0.0001% of technological improvement to some contraption. From this ownership they are allowed to control everything.
For modern technology, the process has been somewhat shorter (although you can argue that scientific and philosophical thinkers for the last couple thousand years have been necessary to develop any technology, i.e. without Aristotle's labor there would be no Super Nintendo). However the same situation has occurred, literally billions of man-hours have been spent just on the software side to create operating systems which are free and open and given to capitalists (such as the Linux kernel and ecosystem). All of this work, as well as the scientific work to create the hardware, represents 99.9999% of the work to create something like OpenAI, and it belongs to all of us. From this, they spend a small amount of money to create a system, and in their case they also train their model off the additional billions of hours of man-hours in writing text, producing knowledge, and creating art, and then they seize control of the output of this work, and use it exclusively for private gain.
Anyway, I could go on, but the gist of it is that Kropotkin thinks this is bad. Some people would call this a bad system.

Resident Philosopher for AI Ethics - Existential Comics

The main problem with Aristotle is that, being a nerd, he thinks you get virtue from reading books, and not from punching stuff.

This is what Aristotle had to say about camels, in case you were curious:

The male camel declines intercourse with its mother; if his keeper tries compulsion, he evinces disinclination. On one occasion, when intercourse was being declined by the young male, the keeper covered over the mother and put the young male to her; but, when after the intercourse the wrapping had been removed, though the operation was completed and could not be revoked, still by and by he bit his keeper to death. A story goes that the king of Scythia had a highly-bred mare, and that all her foals were splendid; that wishing to mate the best of the young males with the mother, he had him brought to the stall for the purpose; that the young horse declined; that, after the mother’s head had been concealed in a wrapper he, in ignorance, had intercourse; and that, when immediately afterwards the wrapper was removed and the head of the mare was rendered visible, the young horse ran way and hurled himself down a precipice.

The Thirteenth Labor of Hercules - Existential Comics

I know it's hard to imagine, but I've even heard that some people like to leave the house and socialize.

The History of What is the Good Life - Existential Comics

"But wait, you haven't listened to my argument yet about how the pit of despair decreases overall happiness!"

Also I finally joined Mastodon, so follow me here: mastodon.social/@existentialcomics

Time Traveling Intellectuals - Existential Comics

Cartesian incel: If your eyes have been deceived once (by a woman wearing makeup), then how can you ever trust your senses again?

Cartesian Pickup Advice - Existential Comics

Freud is funny because he only stole the bad ideas from Nietzsche.

Nietzsche Encounters the Abyss - Existential Comics

I heard all the big insurance companies were so afraid of copycats that they hardly denied any claims for the first few weeks, which makes this a legitmate trolley problem as more lives have probably already been saved than one.

Pretty self explanatory comic. "If I speak I am in big trouble", as they say.

Health Insurance Trolley - Existential Comics

"Can I speak with the manager?"
"Yes, this is Bertrand Russell."
"As a member of the set of all sets that do not contain themselves, and I demand..."

The Philosophy Store - Existential Comics

Yes, some bankers are quite clever in their own way, but being willing to collapse the economy so you can buy a summer house is in fact very stupid.

Juan Amiguet is a $100 patron on Patreon, if you want to give me a $100 a month you too can have cartoon Slavoj Zizek calling you and idiot. Buy now while the offer lasts!

Zizek Gets a Business Loan - Existential Comics

Pragmatists are well known for their ability to bully nerds, that's just a matter of historical record.

Philosophers like Locke and Spinoza in the 17th century argued a lot about whether knowledge comes from rationalism (i.e. thinking about stuff) or empiricism (i.e. looking at stuff). Many took hard line stances that all knowledge comes essentially from only one of the two. It wasn't until philosophers like William James in the 19th century came along that people started to think of knowledge differently, in a more social way. James more or less held that knowledge is merely what works in the world, and progress comes from agreement among a community of thinkers as to what works.
This kind of thinking, along with the more scientific thinking which puts theories to direct testing, is somewhat similar to how sports like MMA changed martial arts by simply testing what actually worked in the real world (which happens to be conking people's heads together like coconuts).

Empiricism vs Rationalism: the Final Fight - Existential Comics

But at least he wasn't wrong. It's better to be on fire than to be wrong, when you think about it.

The Philosophy of Fire - Existential Comics

It could be worse though, imagine you were in a group of Theater Dorks and they were always trying to put on little skits and do improv to pass the time.

Philosophy in 5000 B.C. - Existential Comics

It's a mistake to ground your marriage in pure logic, you have to ground it in empiricism (looking hot).

Bertrand Russell Files for Divorce - Existential Comics

For Rousseau, freedom wasn't just the ability to "do what you want" in a naive sense. Freedom meant obeying one's rationality, which ultimately involved adhering to the rules of a legitimate state, one in which the laws are created by the people themselves, i.e., a democracy. (Although most, if not all, democracies under capitalism might not qualify, given that laws don't necessarily apply equally to the rich and the poor, nor are they equally crafted by both groups.)
Rousseau believed participating in the creation of the laws governing the society in which you live was a crucial aspect of rationality and freedom. People who wish to live in society but do not want to participate in shaping its rules are, in essence, childishly rebelling by attempting to opt out of the social contract.
In other words, Pokémon Go to the Polls.

Sometimes people talk about testing voters on their knowledge before allowing them to vote, but I think forcing them to read Rousseau last minute at gunpoint is just more in line with American Values.

Forced to Be Free - Existential Comics

"Oh and one more thing, if you do happen to write anything down, make sure to get my opinions on how loverboys are still hot even if they grow a beard, people in the future need to know."

The Death of Socrates - Existential Comics

Wait a minute, this complaint comes from the Pope himself, who thought the argument was convincing, this goes deeper than we thought...

The "Galileo Affair" was obviously a pretty funny situation in general. The Catholics were losing so much territory in Europe at that time to Protestantism (relax, it is only England) that they were extremely paranoid about even seemingly insignificant "heresies". Although it is a myth that Galileo was tortured for his views, or even excommunicated, he was condemned and imprisoned for teaching heliocentrism (although it was more like house arrest).
It's quite unclear why exactly it is heretical, of course, to say that the Earth orbits the Sun. The bible sort of suggests that the Sun goes around the Earth, but it isn't some kind of central point about the Earth being the center of the universe because God created Man as the center of all things, like some people seem to think. It's more like, the Bible mentions one time how the Sun stopped in the sky, and that sort of sounds like it means the Sun is moving around the Earth. Not only that, but the Bible probably only takes that view because the people who translated the Bible had that view from Ptolemy, so it isn't so much the Bible being overturned, but Ptolemy. When Copernicus himself presented his ideas to the Pope, a hundred or so years earlier, he was awarded with a gift! But like I said, the Church was very insecure at this time, so I guess they couldn't mess around.
This lead to some pretty funny situations, like some Catholic philosophers refusing to even look through Galileo's telescope, presumably because they were afraid they might themselves get convinced by the evidence, and then be holding heretical opinions. Not much of a philosopher, apparently.
The Pope had actually given Galileo direct permission to argue for heliocentrism, as long as he didn't take a position. Galileo, unfortunately, made the argument far too well, and it was obvious that he believed in heliocentrism. Like the comic suggests, it seems to me that anyone making this argument must have been convinced by Galileo, and therefore heretical themselves. Unfortunately Galileo didn’t take up this argument, and merely denied taking a side on the debate, and also that it wasn't heretical because the bible itself doesn't take sides on physics (two contradicting arguments at once Galileo, not great rhetoric!)
Probably my favorite fact though is that one of his punishments was having to recite seven psalms of penitence once per week, but his daughter Maria Celeste petitioned the Pope to have it count if she did the prayers for him. Presumably this freed up more of his time to...I don’t know, think up more heretical opinions, presumably?

An Alternate History of the Galileo Affair - Existential Comics

Whether Hume actually awoke Kant from his dogmatic slumber or if it was just a coincidence, is truly one of the greatest mysteries of philosophy.

Before reading Hume, Kant was writing more ordinary philosophy, mostly attempting to reconcile empiricism and rationalism. Once he read Hume's skepticism about causation and morality, he was spurred into action into finding a rational basis for morality and attempting to explain the structure of our conscious experience to account for things like space, time and causation. Basically he felt more or less forced to become the greatest philosopher of all time, because Hume's ideas annoyed him so much.

Dogmatic Slumber - Existential Comics

Of course the real answer is that God, in His infinite wisdom, created humans to stare at computer screens for 8 hours a day.

Philosophers have been trying to define what a human is since the beginning, starting perhaps with Plato's hamfisted "featherless biped" which was mocked by Diogenes by presenting a plucked chicken and declaring it a man.
Aristotle thought man was the "rational animal" (remember this was before social media).
Descartes amazingly thought that not only were humans the only animal with souls, but that we were the only animal with any consciousness, and that other animals didn't even experience pain.
Schopenhauer thought the very structure of the human experience, given that we have wants and needs that can never properly be fulfilled, was suffering.
Nietzsche thought one thing that distinguished humans from animals (and perhaps even "lesser" humans, is our ability to extend our will through time by making and fulfilling promises to ourselves.
Sartre thought freedom was the essential trait to humans.
For Wittgenstein, our ability to use language was probably the most unique and defining trait.
For Postmodernists like Derrida, however, there is no human nature, as our nature is almost entirely created by the social context we find ourselves in. By coincidence though, pretty much all the postmodernists seem to be pretty similar (snobby Frenchmen for the most part).

A Brief History of Human Nature - Existential Comics

They named him "Utility Monster"

The Greatest Happiness Possible - Existential Comics

And yes, I am saying that to be a truly great philosopher, you MUST be a master of kung fu.

Ignorance is Bliss - Existential Comics

Edmund Burke argued for something called "virtual representation", which meant that an elected official did NOT represent the people who elected him, but in fact represented the nation as a whole as best he understood. These means that when voting, he should use his own judgment, and not simply vote as the people who elected him would want. On the one hand, these seems absurd, because if a representative doesn’t represent the people who vote for him, what is the point of democracy in the first place? Burke sort of agreed with this, being a kind of elitist and conservative who didn’t really believe in direct democracy. On the other hand though, in many cases it is obviously true that an elector can’t represent the local interests only. In Burke’s own speech defending himself, he was defending his vote against putting tariffs on Irish good that would protect business in his home region. Since he thought he represented Ireland (part of Great Britain at that time) as well as Bristol, he couldn’t vote for it out of pure local interest (he lost the next election, they didn’t like this it turns out).
Ironically, while he was using it to support Irish interests, his concept of “virtual representation” was the main argument used by the English to say that actual representation wasn’t needed for the Irish or the American colonists. They could simply trust that the British representatives would have their best interest at heart. Burke did not agree with this application of it, since the British members of parliament didn’t share common interests with the colonists or Catholic Irish. The Irish and Americans didn’t like the idea of “virtual representation” either, it turns out, hence the revolutions.

Finally an honest politician.