You are too moronic my friend to see the issue with your question
Lived experience? philosophical rumination? are you joking? You know these arent mutually exclusive events you tit. When plato discusses the 'invisible forms' or any other author who talks of the divine and the mystic, it came from them just sitting and thinking random shit. no, they experienced it moron. you cannot talk about virtue and ethics if they didnt have experience of it to begin with? holy shit youre low iq.
The philosophy on NDEs, because it is actually based on what NDErs have experienced. And NDEs are unironically irrefutable proof that heaven really is awaiting us because (1) people see things during their NDEs when they are out of their bodies that they should not be able to under the assumption that the brain creates consciousness, and (2) anyone can have an NDE and everyone is convinced by it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U00ibBGZp7o
So any atheist would be too, so pic related is literally irrefutable proof of life after death. As one NDEr pointed out:
>"I'm still trying to fit it in with this dream that I'm walking around in, in this world. The reality of the experience is undeniable. This world that we live in, this game that we play called life is almost a phantom in comparison to the reality of that."
If NDEs were hallucinations somehow then extreme atheists and neuroscientists who had NDEs would maintain that they were halluinations after having them. But the opposite happens as NDEs convince every skeptic when they have a really deep NDE themselves.
Most of the stoics lived through their philosophy. In general I'd say read Roman philosophers, as Romans didn't really like theoretical ruminations but favored practical experience/skills.
Many ancient philosophers viewed philosophy as a guide to living. Epicurus definitely did, even Socrates and Plato did but for Socrates the process of questioning was also part of his lifestyle, it wasn't that he already had the truth and could stop thinking and just live.
Really I think it's much more rare for a philosopher to see philosophy as something that doesn't apply to life. Even today you have philosophers of ethics like Peter Singer (whatever you might think of his views) that apply their philosophy to their lives.
What you are asking for sounds very similar to what Nietzsche advocates as Dionysian passion and becoming over Apollonian contemplation and being.
>"Singing and dancing crowds, ever increasing in number, were borne from place to place under this same Dionysian power. In these St. John's and St. Vitus's dancers... we again perceive the Bacchic choruses of the Greeks... as far back as Babylon and the orgiastic Sacæa. There are some, who... will turn away from such phenomena as 'folk-diseases' with a smile of contempt or pity... of course, the poor wretches do not divine what a cadaverous-looking and ghastly aspect this very 'health' of theirs presents." -Birth of Tragedy from the Spirit of Music, Nietzsche
Perhaps subjectivism, nihilism and existentialism can be put in play in a way which prioritizes lived experience.
But really, giving primacy to experience is a philosophy in and of itself, perhaps a very tiny and solipsistic, but still.
Why would you need a philosophy that does that when you start from the assumptioj that lived experience trumps theory in importance?
Such philosophy would be "self-terminating" obviously you midwit
This is called living it, you have to live it.
Open a history book, instead of imaginary, escapist fantasies you will find people who truly live it and shape reality in the process.
Your question is nonsensical. Way to ruin a good thread
>Look mom, Im a moron with no capacity for second-layer thinking and i will make sure everyone in this thread will know about it
You are too moronic my friend to see the issue with your question
Lived experience? philosophical rumination? are you joking? You know these arent mutually exclusive events you tit. When plato discusses the 'invisible forms' or any other author who talks of the divine and the mystic, it came from them just sitting and thinking random shit. no, they experienced it moron. you cannot talk about virtue and ethics if they didnt have experience of it to begin with? holy shit youre low iq.
Most philosophy cannot be "lived experience." It is abstract analysis of something.
>lived experience
such as?
Whichever philosophy Dwayne the Rock Johnson or Arnold Schwarzenegger follows
The philosophy on NDEs, because it is actually based on what NDErs have experienced. And NDEs are unironically irrefutable proof that heaven really is awaiting us because (1) people see things during their NDEs when they are out of their bodies that they should not be able to under the assumption that the brain creates consciousness, and (2) anyone can have an NDE and everyone is convinced by it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U00ibBGZp7o
So any atheist would be too, so pic related is literally irrefutable proof of life after death. As one NDEr pointed out:
>"I'm still trying to fit it in with this dream that I'm walking around in, in this world. The reality of the experience is undeniable. This world that we live in, this game that we play called life is almost a phantom in comparison to the reality of that."
If NDEs were hallucinations somehow then extreme atheists and neuroscientists who had NDEs would maintain that they were halluinations after having them. But the opposite happens as NDEs convince every skeptic when they have a really deep NDE themselves.
Socrates
Madhyamaka
This and
Most of the stoics lived through their philosophy. In general I'd say read Roman philosophers, as Romans didn't really like theoretical ruminations but favored practical experience/skills.
Many ancient philosophers viewed philosophy as a guide to living. Epicurus definitely did, even Socrates and Plato did but for Socrates the process of questioning was also part of his lifestyle, it wasn't that he already had the truth and could stop thinking and just live.
Really I think it's much more rare for a philosopher to see philosophy as something that doesn't apply to life. Even today you have philosophers of ethics like Peter Singer (whatever you might think of his views) that apply their philosophy to their lives.
Heidegger and the existentialist
What you are asking for sounds very similar to what Nietzsche advocates as Dionysian passion and becoming over Apollonian contemplation and being.
>"Singing and dancing crowds, ever increasing in number, were borne from place to place under this same Dionysian power. In these St. John's and St. Vitus's dancers... we again perceive the Bacchic choruses of the Greeks... as far back as Babylon and the orgiastic Sacæa. There are some, who... will turn away from such phenomena as 'folk-diseases' with a smile of contempt or pity... of course, the poor wretches do not divine what a cadaverous-looking and ghastly aspect this very 'health' of theirs presents." -Birth of Tragedy from the Spirit of Music, Nietzsche
Mishima's Sun and Steel
Perhaps subjectivism, nihilism and existentialism can be put in play in a way which prioritizes lived experience.
But really, giving primacy to experience is a philosophy in and of itself, perhaps a very tiny and solipsistic, but still.
Tiny? It generally makes way to the snare of solipsism, moral relativism and perspectivism.
Tiny. A miniature philosophical system.
Socratic stoicism?
Ancient Cynicism
empiricism