Who is your favorite philosopher?

Cioran

>>8819977
Why Descartes?

File: 100.jpg (14KB, 804x446px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 804x446px

>>8819977

>>8819977
Nits-she

Elliot Rodger

File: 11003-050-E1616B9C.jpg (149KB, 1254x1600px) Image search: [Google]

149KB, 1254x1600px

>>8819977

>>8819977
i want a piercing but i'm not decided where. what do you fags suggest?

File: 220px-Hegel_portrait_by_Schlesinger_1831.jpg (16KB, 220x278px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 220x278px

>>8820006
I suggest you stop thinking like a fucking teenager and drop the idea

>>8819993
I enjoy his method and the way he breaks everything down. It makes him a joy to read compared to other philosophers (although Plato is fun to read, as well). He was very educated and, as an engineering major, I can appreciate his love for mathematics and geometry. I've always found math fascinating since it never really lies, and any error comes from a fault on your part. Most of his natural science bothers me, but that's basically all pre-modern philosophers.

File: 97cd9e6b79b0c0ce0ace2f2255c10942.jpg (31KB, 236x272px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 236x272px

For all of you who are new here:
when they say 'philosopher' they mean: Western 'freethinkers', preferably post-17th century ones, or one of the greeks (but not pre-Socratics!).

Alasdair MacIntyre and Thomas Aquinas respectively.

>>8820051
Aquinas gets BTFO in Micromegas by Voltaire.

>>8820051
you used respectively wrong

>>8820060
cringe

>>8820068
cringe

>>8820060
literally who

>>8820059
Possible.
How is it wrong?

>>8820077
respectively has to relate to something

you would use respectively to say "my first and second favourite philosophers are Alasdair MacIntyre and Thomas Aquinas, respectively" (I know this isn't what you were meaning to say)

respectively in this example relates the categories of first and second favourites to the listed order. There are more technical explanations out there I'm sure, but this is essentially how it's used

Kant.

>>8820091
Not a native speaker here but "respectively" always seemed totally useless to me.

>my first and second favourite philosophers are Alasdair MacIntyre and Thomas Aquinas

How is it not self evident that the you list the philosophers in the same order, why would anyone mix it up?

Kan.

>>8820108
Not a native speaker either and I don't agree at all. It's not self evident to me.

File: 13046612_1714563255488323_1020195885_n.webm (1MB, 640x640px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 640x640px

Arthur Soapandshower

throws women down stairs and doesn't afraid of anything

>>8820108
>>8820115
for most native speakers and in most situations it would be evident what the speaker means, but that doesn't mean that it's self-evident. diction is important so people know exactly what you mean.

in any case, it may seem useless, but it's literally useless to say "respectively" when there are no categories to pair the list with

>>8820009
why bro you made me sad :(

>>8820115
I don't see any logic in using a different order in the second half of the statement, what would be the reason unless you are speaking and somehow your thoughts get mixed up? But people rarely use respectively in unprepared texts anyway.

File: 220px-Kierkegaard.jpg (13KB, 220x326px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 220x326px

My diary desu's author.

>>8820006
Your genitals or your nipples, I'm serious

>>8819977

Buddha

Any fans of Levinas here? I did Totality and Infinity a while ago, starting Otherwise than Being this Christmas.

mitchell heisman

Hegel

It's actually Marx

>>8820580
zizek pls

File: fishing.webm (995KB, 600x338px) Image search: [Google]

995KB, 600x338px

Heraclitus

>>8820605
no. fuck you. and so on, and so on

Is anyone interested in Gilles Deleuze?

>>8820634
tumblrites

File: kim.png (57KB, 289x247px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 289x247px

Wittgenstein

>>8820645
How is that?
By the way, has anyone read Michael Hardt's book on GD? Hardt, Brian Massumi, and DeLanda are the only three doing work explicitly on him right now. However, Difference and Repetition is the only modern metaphysics that is active in Continental Philosophy.
The others being Heideggerian Phenomenology, and Lacanian-Hegelianism (Due almost exclusively to Mr. Wipes his nose)

>>8820665


>>8820247

been trying to read tractatus lately. anyone into wittgenstein on here? if so, got any tips for comprehending it? is there something i should have read before trying it?

>>8820669
But substantially, there are "professional" theorists making work with his philosophy. Like I said, he is the only modern metaphysician since Heidegger and Lacan with a complete system.

Gabriel Marcel and George Santayana.

>>8820060
when you hate new athiests and sjw's so much you build your whole world view around justifying a god with the premise of lol jung

>>8819977
Based rationalists such as the one in your picture and a few scholastics

>>8820781
His book came out in 1999

>>8820060
Why does /lit/ not like him? I find his maps of meaning lectures very interesting. Is it because of the C-16 shit?

>>8820781
its like you havent even watched his lectures.

>>8820806
regardless he over exaggerates this collective consciousness stuff to an amazing degree

>>8820816

He's disliked because he's relevant, not for any flaws in his premises or ideas.

Ignore them

>>8820830
Provide some arguments

>>8820835
>He's disliked because he's relevant

literally the same argument as
>they are just jealous
just kys

>>8820816
/lit/ likes him well enough.
You're always going to have your contrarians but every time you call their bluff they never respond with an argument for why he's a hack.

File: Spinoza.jpg (235KB, 1138x1100px) Image search: [Google]

235KB, 1138x1100px

>>8819977

>>8820846
the theory isn't falsifiable so conveniently enough there can be no argument for or against, the burden of proof is on him and there is no scientific evidence.

>>8820849

They aren't the same argument at all, retard

You're just sick of hearing about him, which is a shit reason for disliking him

>>8820678
i read tractatus and philosophical investigations at the same time. on the internet there are pretty good sources regarding which parts correspond to each other more or less. Even though, i found it quite doable without any other resources.

that said I also had IRL friends with whom i discussed wittgenstein at the time. I couldnt bear that guy on my own though.

>>8820881
He's not stating it as fact, so some people believe it and some don't.

>>8819977
>You fucking Americucks need validation on everything.

>Read a text.
>Carefully.
>Repeat.

What is your favorite piece of shit, anon?
Ah, the one that looks the most like you?
Of course.

>>8820890
there might be a magic unicorn in my garden right now too.

>>8820907
If that works for you fine, you won't convince many people of it however!
Also sounds a lot like the argument I made against my parents when I was 12. sad!

>>8820678
>is there something i should have read before trying it?
The introduction of your copy of the Tractatus.

>>8820897
They also beg for a tutorial for even the most insignificant of things

Camus is bae
I can appreciate Kant's goals and his conclusions and his worldview but damn nigga does he write like an autist

>>8820913
If I sound smart and keep mentioning how Jung was so deep and special and no one understands but me then I'm sure I'll get some people. many such cases

neet shit

>>8820936
Dopey anon is intimidated by Peterson his intellect, goes to 4chan and starts straw manning. Resentment! many such cases!

>>8820935
Camus is a complete meme, Metaphysical rebel! Cigarette smoking nonchalant existentialism! All French philosophy is style over substance

>>8820956
>metaphysical rebel
If you read any of his philosophy you'd know the importance Camus places on operating within the confines of societal morals

>>8820977
I have and he's pointless. Admit you're a shallow cunt

>>8820867
This guy know what's up

>>8820956
All philosophy pretty much you mean. How has reading it changed your life?

>>8821016
fag

>>8820955
kek

File: AIDSintensifies.jpg (52KB, 335x380px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 335x380px

>>8821018
Yes he was a fag. Your point?

>>8821021
you are a fag as well

File: Terence Mckenna.jpg (238KB, 584x487px) Image search: [Google]

238KB, 584x487px

>>8819977
I'm curious who on /lit/ knows about T. Mckenna and what they think about him

>>8820116
enough to carry loaded pistols

>>8821026
DUDE

>>8821026
He's between Timothy Leary and Robert Anton Wilson on the LSD casualty scale.

>>8821040
Is Robert Anton Wilson worth reading?

>>8821026
dude the 60's

>>8821025
Say some one who probably never read any of his book.

Just give Society Must be Defended a try and report back. It changed my life.

>>8821026
GOAT

>>8821043
Much more so than the other two.

>>8821026
>tfw I had a Mckenna phase that lasted no more than a week
Fucking Joe Rogan

>>8821046
>reading books by fags

>>8820053
Voltaire was a moron. He BTFO no one but himself in his entire life

>>8821060
I don't even know why I keep replying to you, you're just a kid who just discovered 4chan, and thinks that entire site is lol so randum edgy trolling.

I'm guess I'm bored.

Both Voltaire and Descartes should've been beheaded.

File: 8liw3txV.jpg (24KB, 512x512px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 512x512px

funky ideas

Kant.
>inb4 le ebin God is death XDDD my dude

>>8821069
what's wrong with Descartes? except for all the God did it shit

File: T Mckenna.jpg (69KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 1280x720px

>>8821040
I'm not familiar with Wilson, and only vaguely with Leary. What do you mean?

>>8821051
It's easy to be alienated by his ideas. I'm particularly interested in his ideas on UFOs and language as a linguistic organism. But I always enjoy listening to him and I think many of his ideas are great.

>>8821047
Haven't found anyone else who can change as many of my ideas as radically.

File: Decadence intensifies.png (2MB, 1197x1241px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1197x1241px

>No one posts the last philosopher of note

Anything after 1900 has proven shit.

>>8820802
>>8820867
This

>>8821087
Too mainstream for /lit/

>>8821087
I posted his biggest fanboy, does that count?

>>8821016

>>8820919
WRONG.

Bertrand Russell didn't understand the book and Wittgenstein tried very hard to remove his introduction from the book but publishers wouldn't release it without it.

File: AIDS.jpg (52KB, 960x912px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 960x912px

>>8821095

>Biggest fan boy
>Writes an entire book on the basis of drawing a distinction between some words that Nietzsche was using interchangeably
>Lives an absolutely decadent, orgy-filled life that inevitably ended with AIDs

Sorry bud, although a lot of 20th century """philosophers""" - French in particular - claim to have been 'influenced' by Nietzsche, despite the fact that they conveniently ignore his most extreme conclusions.

>>8821096

Wittgenstein was just pulling the ol' Hegel trick.

>"N-N-No-one understands m-me, that's h-how good my work i-is!"

>>8821113
>>Lives an absolutely decadent, orgy-filled life that inevitably ended with AIDs
>Implying that's not the most unbermensch way to live and die. Not living by any standards of "morality" and what not by your own, even if it means dying of aids. Don't forget Nietzsche died from syphilis he contracted from a prostitute.

>>8821130
edgy

Hegel.

>>8820928
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u2j578jTBCY

>>8821135
Well living the ubermensch life is seens as edgy by the sheep.

>>8821130
>NEETche was all about creating your moral code.
>Le ebin hedonism and meaningless life is what he meant le XDD.
Sure thing pal

File: Wew.png (75KB, 500x448px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 500x448px

>>8821130

>Implying that's not the most unbermensch way to live and die. Not living by any standards of "morality" and what not by your own, even if it means dying of aids

The ubermensch makes his own morality, whereas decadence is the absence of such - "world-laziness", as Nietzsche calls it. Decadence/hedonism are extremely easy things to live by - they are not morality/standards so much as the absence of morality/standards.

>Don't forget Nietzsche died from syphilis he contracted from a prostitute.

This was a posthumous lie, though - usually claimed to be the cause of his madness/etc. The reality was that he had a slow-growing tumour behind his right eye socket for many years, which caused his health and sight to deteriorate (alongside the injury he received whilst mounting his horse during his time as a cavalryman within the Prussian army.)

The tumour probably ended up pushing too much against his cranium, which eventually induced madness.

>>8821146
Kek

>>8821146
lmao mr enlightened being

>>8819977
Machiavelli and Fromm, entry level as they get, but I always come back to them.

>>8821071
Is that Bill Nye the science guy?

>>8821118
Except Russell always misunderstood his work on multiple instances.

>>8821156
Honestly I haven't been to 4chan in months and am just readjusting to shitposting.

In all honesty all I know about Nietzsche is from reading Foucault, especially his Nietzsche, Genealogy, History.

I should really read at least Genealogy of morals, just too see what Nietzsche actually meant.

>>8819977

The D

>>8821163

I'm referring to Wittgenstein and his work in general, rather than just Russell's interpretation.

>>8821147
Well let's be fair that's pretty Dionysian

>>8820031

Maybe you'll like Spinoza. He's like a logically consistent Descartes.

>>8821218

Nietzsche wanted the Apollonian and the Dionysian to be balanced with one another - to compliment one another.

Too Apollonian and you become a Socrates. Too Dionysian and you become a Dionysus. One of the biggest problems throughout history, to him, is that people err in favour of one extreme in this regard. Take, for example, a quintessential "muh logic and reason" New Atheist.

>>8820781

I can respect anyone who shits on neoatheism.

>>8821118
>"N-N-No-one understands m-me, that's h-how good my work i-is!"
I understand them both, now where's your god

>>8821237
The balance thing was just his early work. He then just wait full autist in beyond good and evil

>>8821279

Examples please. I have my copy to hand.

Good question. I'm probably the only person on /lit/ who can truly claim to have read every major philosopher comprehensively. I've been fascinated by philosophy ever since I read Will Durant's Story of Philosophy when I was fourteen. I didn't know enough then to pick up on Durant's mistakes and omissions, but the book was pivotal in sparking my interest in the subject. It would become my life's passion. I went on to study philosophy in college and am now preparing to embark on my own academic career. It may sound sentimental, but I am very much looking forward to inspiring the next generation of critical thinkers. All that said, I would have to say the greatest philosopher of all time is probably my friend Terrence from back home. He never did well in school, and he was quiet most of the time, but when he did speak up, what he said would stop everybody in their tracks.

>>8821240
yeah, I'm especially sick of all these new athiests at my door trying to convert me and bombing marketplaces

>>8821294
give me an example of Terence's wisdom

John Locke

File: weeew.jpg (77KB, 653x590px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 653x590px

>>8821313

>Spares your life
>Makes you his slave

Choose both.

>>8820816
>>8820857
because he's a PSYCHOLOGIST talking about social issues / philosophy, also psychology is a pseudoscience. he's literally the new sam harris, a seasoned rhetorician talking about shit he knows nothing about entirely fueled by his rhetoric ability. might as well let a historian run the economic system.

and on his actual work. he sucks the dicks of the famous narcissistic schizoid rhetoricians jung and neechee. i mean i get why people who like to talk around in circles to build up imaginary castles of "truth" in their fantasy land to deal with reality would like him. but he's a cunt rhetorician who plays mental gymnastics to cloud the substanceless shit that lies underneath. unsurprisingly the alt-right / FUCK SJWS movements love him.
>>8820835
what ideas? please enlighten me on some of his ideas outside of bill c-16.
>>8820886
yea people are sick of hearing about a rhetorician cunt who acts like being able to rhetorically crush a bunch of normal people is something to be impressed by.
his fans are more cancerous than him though i'll give him that.

>>8821338
this is what I was trying to say earlier only in a much better way, he's all style no substance mostly

>>8821402
>only in a much better way
which one's your post?

>>8821071
bertrand russell is my favourite

>>8821402
>>8821338
No arguments to be seen here, not surprisingly.
Talk about empty rhetoric

>>8821338
im not even memeing but this isn't even an argument.

>>8821455
>>8821460
>i've got no argument so i'm going to say you have no argument
well played!

File: 65665.png (51KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 500x500px

>>8821463
All you did was call him:
>a psychologist (in all caps)
>his field pseudoscience
>new Sam Harris
>seasoned rhetorician
>sucks dick of other rhetoricians
>build imaginary castles
>mental gymnastics
>substanceless shit
NONE of these are arguments, the phrase is a bit of a meme but I can't respond with anything else since there is no argument to be seen in your post.

File: coolmen.png (57KB, 159x190px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 159x190px

SIMONE WEIL desu

paterson shills are the new new athiests

CA-RINGE

>>8821470
do you just look at phrases in long posts and quote them all out of context as if that's supposed to mean anything at all?
if you're going to cop out just don't reply, i don't get why you have to solidify how incapable you are.

>>8821482
Fine, point out a single argument in your post for me, since I'm too stupid.

>>8821300

I respect suicide bombers more than I respect internet atheists. They're equally annoying, but at least suicide bombers have courage.

>>8821486
>I'm too stupid!
only valid point you've made so far. maybe you'd be better off on a low iq board.

>>8821530
good reply

>>8821565
He argued without once bowing to the false song of coherency, truly an intellect to reckon with.

>>8821565
likewise
>>8821586
>i'm going to fashion an overly masturbatory metaphor while running away from any argument
maybe you should stick to writing your bad poetry buddy

Reminder that you are officially autistic if you read any philosophy beyond Greek and Christian philosophy

File: Jacques_Derrida_on_American_Attitude_-_YouTube_-_2016-12-09_22.42.21.png (16KB, 735x69px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 735x69px

>>8821142
I read this comment and immediately thought of all those shit recommendation threads here on /lit/

>>8821609
Everyone is autistic here, honey. Hell, I bet actual autists had more sex than me.

>>8821586
I really need to laugh right now, get me a link, I beseech you.

>>8821657
I'm actually autistic and all 3 times I tried having sex with women I couldn't stay hard, if that makes you feel better

>>8820128
this, Kierks is unironically /ourguy/. His philosophy just werks.

>>8821712
That is more sex than me.

File: youth.jpg (79KB, 529x529px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 529x529px

>>8819977

>>8821609
I'm pretty sure the autism is to be found in restricting yourself to two categories of philosophy.

Actually, it's probably kind of autistic to care about more philosophy than can be condensed into a facebook post.

>>8821026
I find many of his lectures really interesting, but at times he just sounds fried, stoned, half in the bag

>>8820618
Can you elaborate on that? I've only recently been getting into philosophy (as in reading actual works) and I found it difficult to appreciate the Presocratics. I found Parmenides and the Eleatic school interesting but for most of the rest it was kind of a "huh" reaction. Maybe I'm just dumb or ignorant

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pNNbJ04167I

File: 1477869179945.jpg (74KB, 720x675px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 720x675px

>>8819997
This

>>8821032
what are you implying faget

>>8822187

He's just a hipster, ignore him.

>>8821472
Simone Weil's only significance intellectually, is that she had a certain older brother.

>>8821609
Pretty sure Socrates and Plato were aspies
>muh forms

>>8821046
Not the guy you were responding to. I stopped about halfway through Discipline and Punish because i felt like i got what he was going for and couldn't be bothered to wade through 200 pages of his writing. Is he that easily understood or did i delude myself into thinking i understood him? I know it sounds like I'm trolling, but I'm not.

Kant and Hegel. And so should you.
Also the smidgeon of Heidegger I've read. My body is prepared.

>>8819977
I am too nub to philo, and have only read the Greeks so far. Well, I also read an essay Sartre wrote, and a summary of Existentialist thought, but I'm not really counting those.

That being said, I really like Plato.

>>8822315
Yours was the hipster response, lad.

>>8820618
I'm also interested as to why. I intend to read Heraclitus.

>>8822377
If you don't understand the brilliance of the Greeks, you need to start all over - you've missed EVERYTHING.

>>8819977
That kid from high school who loved Hitler and had some rather interesting ideas about the futility of life.

>>8820980
>claim that I have read his work with no proof
>make blanket statement that confirms my lack of knowledge on his work
>non-sequitur that has nothing to do with what we're talking about
Damn son you're batting 0/3

>>8821482

This is amazing. You're proving his point even more.

rhetoric status:
[_] substantiated
[x] empty

Pretty basic, but I'd say either Wittgenstein or Kierkegaard

>>8820031
>>8821235
>Descartes
>Spinoza
Can you guys recommend some books written by them?

>>8819977
My man, Heidegger.

>>8824851
>Descartes
Meditations on First Philosophy
Regarding Method
>Spinoza
Ethics

>>8821623
this describes Peterson so well

Nietzsche, read as a feminist

>>8824861
Must be a very selective reading.

>>8824864
yeah, there's like one book of secondary literature on this i know of

>>8822187
>>8824226
Heraclitus of Ephesus got this beautiful thing started:
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/process-philosophy/

>>8824861
end yourself, my cucc

>>8821785
Explain this

Find it hard to choose between my bois Kant and Hegel.

>>8824856
Best translations?

>>8824980
fucc you, cuckie

>>8821153
The Ubermensch isn't merely individual, it is a people. The concept relies on the destruction of our historical-hegemonic morality (Reason) up to the Last Man. Foucault (and most of the french theorists you are referring to) try to engage in exactly that. The destruction of liberal humanism. Obviously "liberalism" here refers to the broader concept that includes classical liberalism up to the neoliberalism of today.

It's obvious why most dudes have the conception of Nietzsche that you have, concerning this "ubermensch makes his own morality" as if it's an individual who can live in this day, in this world. It is because, like all of us, we are consumed by liberal ideology, we are born into it and are forced to live and breathe in it.

>>8825301
I should stress that the french theorists I have in mind represent /attempts/ at contributing to this legacy. Their success or failure is another question. Although I would argue their work is obviously useful for anyone trying to engage with Nietzsche and the destruction of liberalism today.

File: nietzsche-whip-401x372.jpg (35KB, 401x372px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 401x372px

>>8821087
I love Neety hes such a qt pie. Hes like a big old teddy bear I just wanna hug.

>>8825085
I haven't read them in English

>>8825420
I love this picture

>>8825301

>The Ubermensch isn't merely individual, it is a people.

A very small number of people. The creators, to be specific - which is his point in Thus Spoke Zarathustra when Zarathustra realizes that addressing the 'rabble' is a waste of time.

>The concept relies on the destruction of our historical-hegemonic morality (Reason) up to the Last Man.

Nietzsche didn't strive for the destruction of 'Reason.' Rather, he wanted its recovery - and in some of his later work claims to use his 'Recovered Reason' in dealing with some issues.

>"ubermensch makes his own morality" as if it's an individual who can live in this day, in this world

I never said it was currently feasible. My point was that decadence - such as that exhibited by Foucault/etc - IS currently feasible.

>>8820580
It could be argued Marx wasn't much of a philosopher

>>8820817
nigga looks like ET

>>8821338
A specialization in psychology or practicing a profession in psychology does not disqualify someone from trying to understand the world and people around him.

>might as well let a historian run the economic system.

People aren't cogs that fit into neatly stenciled holes. People can, and should achieve an education in a variety of interests. They should extend their education beyond their formal schooling and away from the field of their work or leisure. To do different is to be content with a meager inhuman existence filled with isolation from the world around you.

>>8820129
why is that? i mean nipples yeah but genitals that seems disgusting thanks anon

>>8825301
I didn't mean the destruction of all reason, just the one that has created us, in our (and his) time. Either way, Nietzsche is great and vital, but he is not the only one who's works are worthwhile to read. Making a standard of thought based on one person's writing and comparing all others to it is reactionary and hopeless. I'm not accusing you of this, but that phenomenon is almost universal on this site.

>>8819985
Ce fraier

>>8826045
Meant for
>>8825486

>>8822164
I came here to post this

>>8820006
I would never even entertain the though for myself

>>8820116
i don't afraid either

>>8820060
He's just a normal person saying normal person stuff.

File: 1200.jpg (69KB, 1200x675px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 1200x675px

>>8820116
>tfw that girl probably fucks NBA players only

>>8820816
I listened to his Joe Rogan podcast and I respect him for his anti-SJW stuff but equating SJW's with Stalinist Russia is absurd. 20th century totalitarianism isn't coming back. Bread and circuses are far more effective. Also psychology isn't a "science" like he claims.

File: image.jpg (45KB, 407x324px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 407x324px

sarte
pls no bully

>>8820006

prefrontal cortex

>>8820619
*Shniff*

>>8822367
Which no one remembers.

>>8825493
It can also be argued that half the people mentioned ITT aren't philosophers