Jung

File: 08-mein-kampf.w529.h529[1].jpg (84KB, 529x529px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 529x529px

>>8924589
This is our last hope. Fuck off with your psychobabble nonsensical unfalsifiable continental cuckery

>>8924596
>idolizing a socialist, vegan, femenist, art student
Who are you calling cucked?

File: fff10e48e5435eda51420e0ff1547295[1].jpg (55KB, 448x550px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 448x550px

>>8924607
So?
I'm a white nationalist

>>8924625
You sound like a fuckin fairy. Kill yourself.

>>8924589
Freud's better half.
Jung had his time, I don't think he is our "last hope"

When/as this neoliberal economic shit blows up in our faces, people and scholars may revisit him, but as for now, he is falling into obscurity.

>>8924625
And? What the fuck does this have to do with the thread? Are you so insecure about yourself they you have to flaunt your edgy tryhard ideology around as part of your identity, even when it's irrelevant?

>>8924589
>>8924625

This /pol/ cuck hasn't left his computer for hours; jumps at the first /lit/ or /his/ post he can.

File: 1480006151944.jpg (10KB, 350x490px)

10KB, 350x490px

>>8924589
>He thinks modern philosophy is all materialism
This is as bad as the people who just assume that since they think morality isn't real the whole of academia agrees with them despite not actually knowing anything about contemporary philosophy.

>>8924639
>>He thinks modern philosophy is all materialism
>This is as bad as the people who just assume that since they think morality isn't real the whole of academia agrees with them despite not actually knowing anything about contemporary philosophy.
I dont see the correlation. OP sounds like he disagrees with materialism

>>8924589
>Is he a total nutcase or the last hope against materialism?
Can't he be both?

i.e., Just because I'm crazy, doesn't mean I'm not right.

>>8924639
>He thinks modern philosophy is all materialism
The vast majority of it definetly is

>>8924644
The correlation is people assuming modern philosophers agree with their world view without being familiar with modern philosophy.

>>8924654
No it isn't. I'm not saying it's stupid, I'm not saying it's wrong. I am saying that there is a large proportion of non-materialistic philosophers so to ask if Jung is the last bulwark against it is bunk.

>>8924633
Freud is wrong and boring.

Jung is wrong in a very entertaining way.

He's a first-rate sorcerer who had the misfortune to born in a universe where magic isn't real.

>>8924678
>The correlation is people assuming modern philosophers agree with their world view without being familiar with modern philosophy.
But hes assuming they disagree

>>8924681
>thinks subjective experience must be magic
You old romantic, you.

>>8924684
No. He is assuming that all, or practically all modern philosophers are materialists, and that he doesn't like materialism so that he is going back to Jung as some sort of last non-materialist.

>>8924654
http://www.preposterousuniverse.com/blog/2013/04/29/what-do-philosophers-believe/
Also here is a survey done among mostly Anglophone philosophers as to the contents of their beliefs. Please note the entry about minds.

>>8924596
>>8924625
fuck off nazi faggot

>>8924695
I said it isn't real, not that it it's meaningless or unimportant.

>>8924711
Such arbitrary distinctions around realness, then.

>>8924684
I don't know how I managed to misread what you meant so many times. The correlation is in they share the same baseless sense that they know the state of modern philosophy, not to weather they agree or disagree with it.

>>8924697
>Anglophone philosophers
into the trash.gif

>>8924625

Haha you're such a fucking faggot you basically advocate being against critical, independent thought. Fuck off forever /lit/ is not /pol/. Vast majority of us praise the Age of Enlightenment whereas people like you and the rest of the far right piss all over it and want to dictate how others should live based on your limited, arbitrary, subjective world views and infantile emotions.

>my crush who friendzoned me kissed a coloured person
>REEEEEE hang all niggers!!!!!

kill yourself

File: 1482667635140.jpg (103KB, 690x769px) Image search: [Google]

103KB, 690x769px

>>8924589

>Last hope against materialism
>Capitalist society full of brainwashed idiots with the USA as capitalist powerhouse

>>8924881
stay mad

>>8924589
There is literally nothing wrong with materialism

>>8924971

>Mad

Why would I be mad? White population of whites in the USA is at an all time LOW. Vast majority are not retarded supremacists especially the women and eventually you will be a minority in maybe a couple decades.

>>8924678
>non-materialistic philosophers

Not even memeing, define: non-material

>>8925033
It's pretty hard to define succinctly in a quick 4chan post without making mention to materialism. Non-materialists is literally everyone who thinks that materialism is wrong. They can be either dualists or monists or double aspect theorists (though that could probably be described as monistic).

The problem with defining it is that it's like saying define non-German. You can be French, or English etc, but they don't have anything in common because it's a grouping made entirely for the purpose of being the opposite of something so that it cannot be easily defined without reference to the thing to which they are opposed.
If you want definitions of specific kinds of non-material philosophies I highly recommend Standford's encyclopedia of philosophy as your go to guide.

>>8925060
Yea, thanks.

I suppose, I was commenting on the difficult semantics of the term 'material'.

It seems like a potentially arbitrary semantical distinction, like whats the deal with the word 'substance' and spinoza? Is there any non material substance?

I would personally say, there can only be that which can actually 'physically' exist, and that which does and cannot: I would semantically refer to that 'which exists/can exist' as 'material'.

Though I understand this may interestingly open a can of worms, hopefully saying such can start an interesting discussion

>>8924625

Do /pol/acks realise it really wasn't just whites that built America? Do they realise that picture is a simulacra? Do they know Baudrillard?

>>8925085
Spinoza is a bit of a tricky case. He is normally thought of as a materialist but it depends on how you define your terms. There is a bit about that in this article on idealism. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/idealism/

> I would semantically refer to that 'which exists/can exist' as 'material'
It doesn't sound like a very useful definition because you have simple made a definition by which every person is a materialist and cannot be otherwise. I don't have an opinion on the matter either way since it is far too complex a topic for any non-academic person. It only rustles me when fedoras equate even the consideration of the non-material as the same as proof of mental retardation putting you on the same level as a Scientologist.

If I believe that the Cthulhu mythos is literally true, am I a materialist?

>>8924607
>>8924631
>>8924634
>>8924637
>>8924698
>>8924881
>>8925091
Why is it that /lit/ gets baited so easily? Other boards don't seem to.

>>8925181
Because leftists instinctively react violently toward ideas opposed to their own.

>>8925183
This is a phenomenom exclusive to the left. Never, ever has a pol9k user EVER reacted violently to ideas opposed to their own.

>>8925195
Political violence is an attack combined with systematic power. The left holds systematic power and oppresses the right academically, socially, etc., therefore only the left can be politically violent. Something the right does may appear to be the same thing, but it is not.

>>8925223
>academically
The good old the whole worlds peer-reviewed learning institutions are in a massive conspiracy against me because they don't agree with me. Don't worry buddy. One day we will being able to break their power and preach the truth. The world is flat!

>>8925223
>/pol/kek using the "racism is privilege + power" argument
wewlad

File: AP_16342088490141-1280x720.jpg (82KB, 1280x720px)

82KB, 1280x720px

>>8925234
we saul alinsky now

>>8925233
Thank for proving my point, bigot.

>>8925181
/lit/ is on average wise enough that they don't have much experience dealing with idiots but not so wise that they immediately know how to act when one suddenly does turn up.

>>8925251
No worry friend. Doing everything I can to help the world realise that unsubstantiated beliefs that require a global conspiracy to control every single university in the world, including all the tens of thousands of academics and every single government that funds them, is true. Almost the whole planet is out to get us. We have to warn everyone.

File: 1420042441891.gif (2MB, 200x200px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 200x200px

>>8924589
>mfw a Jung thread is ruined by /pol/fags
Damn shame

>>8925266
Who said anything about a global conspiracy? Please stop using strawmen to deny the oppression of minority communities you hate.

>>8925278
You did. The only way for the sort of academia assault on your ideas to happen is for there to be complete collusion of thousands of higher education facilities, with the near entirety of all professors with the tacit support of most of the worlds governments and of all major news networks.

>>8925297
Please read the stories of conservative professors and the oppression they have faced before forcing your hateful narrative upon them. Their experiences are real and bigots like you do not get to define them.

>>8925301
No, you need to provide substantiation evidence to support your claim. It's not my job to hunt for it. The burden of proof is upon you. I don't doubt many universities have a left leaning culture but that is far cry from what you termed political violence. You would have to prove this was attack was intentional, deliberate, sustained, and that it was widespread throughout a large majority of higher education institutions throughout the world. Now please, go find me that evidence.

>>8925329
You need to reread what I said. I said that political violence cannot be carried out by an oppressed class (such as conservatives). The fact that they are oppressed is not necessarily caused by violence. I never claimed widespread violence against conservatives in academia, only that they are oppressed.

>>8925338
So are you saying that all of the terrorist attacks made by the IRA weren't examples of political violence because they were an oppressed group? That modern Kurdish suicide bombings in Turkey aren't political violence? That the race riots after the assassination of Martin Luther King jr weren't acts of political violence?

>>8925364
How can you be "violent" against someone who is oppressing you? If a slave kills his master, is he being "violent?" Do you support slavery?

>>8925375
Yes that is violence. If you're trying to bait then you're retarded at it.

>>8925375
>If a slave kills his master, is he being "violent?" Do you support slavery?
You're gonna need some more straw.

You claim first of all that oppression need not contain any violence and that those that are oppressed are incapable of committing political violence. Yet it is also clear that for you it doesn't matter who is oppressing and who is being oppressed and why, only that there are two such parties. You're definition of oppression can't be very severe either if conservatives are considered oppressed.
So it is completely consistent from your own position that a person, or a small group (who for the sake of argument are pure evil and everything that want to do is evil) are very mildly and peacefully oppressed by the majority (who again for the sake of argument are pure good and only oppress the evil ones to prevent them from doing evil), then if this group were to set off a nuke killing 20 million people for the express purpose of achieving a political goal, a goal they are trying to achieve through violence, is not an act of political violence. This is bollocks.

>>8925414
>Pure good oppressors.

Privileged people actually believe this exists.

>>8925375

>How can you be "violent" against someone who is oppressing you

oh boy

>>8925424
>what is a hypothetical situation