My Philosophy

And moreover, to say that we invent values means neither more nor less than this; that there is no sense in life a priori. Life is nothing until it is lived; but it is yours to make sense of, and the value of it is nothing else but the sense that you choose.

— Jean-Paul Sartre, Existentialism is a Humanism

I derive meaning from subjective experience. I think that our own experience of the world is what makes life worth living. We create our own meaning through the things we do that are meaningful to us.

This meaning is valuable regardless of the length of one's life. It's better for someone to live as long as they wish, for their own sakes, but their subjective meaning is what matters overall.

We believe that most of the ills that afflict mankind stem from a bad social organisation; and that Man could destroy them if he wished and knew how.

— Errico Malatesta, "An Anarchist Programme"

People should be able to organize themselves as they wish, through mutual consent and collaboration, without the control of a higher authority. People are able to create a variety of different societies with or without hierarchies, and we should seek to abolish all hierarchies (including the state, white supremacy, and patriarchy).

Hierarchy is what causes most of our society ills. In a free society built from equals acting for the individual and collective interest, we would be incentivized and empowered to resolve these ills and perpetually improve the lives of ourselves and others.

My ethical philosophy is agency-consequentialism. I believe we should maximize freedom for all sentient beings. This requires being in harmony with our environments as a precondition.

The way I think we know things is roughly scientific skepticism. Truth claims should be assumed to be false unless sufficient evidence can be found to verify their authenticity.

I believe the universe exists regardless of our capacity to understand it. When we develop theories, they are images of reality that we should constantly work to improve based on what we learn. When new information contradicts our models, we should change them accordingly. This is similar to, as I understand it, Plato's concept of "saving the phenomena."

I am a physicalist/materialist. I believe everything in the universe consists of matter and energy. Other phenomena, from rocks to philosophy, are emergent from these.

I am an atheist. I do not believe there has been sufficient evidence to demonstrate the existence of supernatural powers or beings that are not simply emergent social or psychological phenomena. These phenomena can be powerful, moving, and real subjectively, but I don't see evidence of them being supernatural entities. This is directly derived from my epistemology.

Religions often require people to accept ways of knowing that are almost entirely untestable. This is one of the main reasons I oppose religion generally.

I recognize that many religions, especially those tied to a local culture, have embedded knowledge which can be invaluable to interacting with the world in a healthy way. I also believe these aspects can be accepted and used without positive belief in the spiritual.