Some of the brightest philosophers today seem to have chosen

>>9243636
>Some of the brightest philosophers today seem to have chosen multimedia as their medium of choice
wrong
>How will academia respond to this: will we see more and more traditional scholars dialoguing with youtubers
no

File: nietzsche.jpg (51KB, 499x499px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 499x499px

>>9243636
>>9243645
Demosthenes was the greatest orator of the ancient world, and yet there is not even a single line of his embedded in the collective consciousness to compare to the reams of those of the philosophers. — A note on the philosophical, at any rate, value of rhetoric.

Why is rhetoric of so much less value than writing? The orator only has to convince those who happen to be present when he delivers his oration, the philosopher has to "convince" the entire future. Oratorical skill is not merely irrelevant for us but a downright weakness. To HAVE to talk to "people" — that is how weakness is defined for us. Between higher and lower, as I've already said, there can be no communication. That is the province, not of words, but of actions.

Note that what I said about rhetoric also applies to YouTube videos, "pod"casts, public debates, interviews and smoke signals. Real intellectuals will always choose writing, all other forms of communication (including, by the way, direct discussion) are for peasants.

These pop philosophers show not the slightest acknowledgement in their writings that a philosophical tradition even exists, and that the intractable problems with which they are so incompetently grappling have been discussed ad nauseam for millennia by all the geniuses. — All these efforts, at the end of the day, are obviously inherently abortive, since contrary to what all these people seem to think, you can't defeat a beast by RUNNING AWAY FROM IT. There's only one solution: to GRAPPLE with the beast, which is to say, WITH THE ENTIRE HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY, which of course presupposes that you have at least some inkling of it! In short: Don't be a pseud. Don't abortive. Be a man. Be a genius. — Or at least try to be one, the first step of which attempt would be... to see how you measure up against past geniuses, by making at least some kind of an effort to read them.

>>9243706
>The orator only has to convince those who happen to be present when he delivers his oration, the philosopher has to "convince" the entire future.

This criticism holds no weight when talking about digital recordings that can be viewed till the end of time. I don't know why you mentioned it, this is sort of dumb.

>Real intellectuals will always choose writing, all other forms of communication (including, by the way, direct discussion) are for peasants.

Almost every single intellectual you can think of has spoken publicly. Some even have a number of lectures transcribed.

I am embarrassed for you.

>>9243636
Do you seriously consider that guy one of the brightest philosophers today?

There is no hope for you

>>9243636
I think a lot of universities are making lectures available on youtube

The European Graduate School has a great channel. You can listen to lectures by some of continental philosophies brightest minds, like Zizek, Baudrillard, Virilio, Harraway, Butler, Badiou and others.

https://www.youtube.com/user/egsvideo

I think the real question should be flipped around. Why would you only do youtube/podcasts? Zizek writes films, gives lectures, gives interviews, makes public speeches, makes movies. He seems to have the multimedia approach figured out.

File: hitler[1].jpg (15KB, 460x259px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 460x259px

>>9243706
>Why is rhetoric of so much less value than writing?
It isn't. Only autists would think that.
Pic related, proof that the transformative power of politics (rhetoric) is infinitely superior to philosophy

>>9243738
sorry meant to say "writes books" not "writes films". But that should be obvious anyway.

>>9243739
Godwin's law.

>>9243731
>This criticism holds no weight when talking about digital recordings that can be viewed till the end of time. I don't know why you mentioned it, this is sort of dumb.
FUCKING RETARD. Read before you write.
>>>Note that what I said about rhetoric also applies to YouTube videos
codex, even digital recordings (ebooks) of Demosthenes can be 'viewed till the end of time' and will at least be appreciated longer than Molyneux' will, not to speak of actual philosophers.

>Almost every single intellectual you can think of has spoken publicly.
Naturally, they were probably communicating with students (intellectual children) or the rabble (politics).

>Some even have a number of lectures transcribed.
And the fact that this is the EXCEPTION should tell even your thick skull something.

>>9243739
Looked at more closely, it is not the alphas who make the rules but the philosophers. The alphas merely put them into practice, as the Han dynasty did with Confucius' philosophy, Alexander with Aristotle's, the Roman emperors with the Stoics' and the Epicureans', Lenin and Mao with Marx's, Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini and Franco with Nietzsche's, and even the democratic pseudo-leaders, to an extent, with the pseudo-philosophers' liberal claptrap. It is only subhumans who think that philosophy is superfluous and causes nothing, but as the fascists' and communists' millions of victims discovered (a little too late for their liking), not only is philosophy (which is to say thought) not superfluous, but it makes the world go round.

>>9243636
Not an argument

>>9243779
>hitler, stalin, mussolini and franco with nietzsche's
>reducing these 4 to nietzschean philosophy

ITT a dearth of arguments

File: 1472962563376.png (178KB, 330x319px) Image search: [Google]

178KB, 330x319px

>>9243636
I love how alt-righters have convinced themselves that their youtube heroes are worth being taken seriously. Stefan Molyneux made a video recently called "Don't go to college" and the reason is because he needs highschool dropouts like you to keep clicking on his dumb videos.

File: 1489312020246.jpg (176KB, 796x761px) Image search: [Google]

176KB, 796x761px

>>9243773
>FUCKING RETARD. Read before you write.

not an argument

>codex, even digital recordings (ebooks) of Demosthenes can be 'viewed till the end of time' and will at least be appreciated longer than Molyneux' will, not to speak of actual philosophers.

So now Demosthenes is simultaneously irrelevant and relevant

>And the fact that this is the EXCEPTION should tell even your thick skull something.

Wittegenstien, Hegel and Neechee all do this. You will find the opposite is the exception.

why would they bother with stupid people?

What Pisses me off about The Jews.

File: hqdefault-2.jpg (8KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 480x360px

>mfw yootoobers

>How will academia respond

Some sociologist somewhere will do a study about it and probably link it to the erosion of stable masculine identity positions.

saged and hidden.

>>9243636
>How will academia respond
by ignoring them because they're irrelevant

>>9243739
People will elect any buffoon if they think they can make it look like their being coerced by him into doing things that are usually sanctioned by society.
Hitler's oratory skills are blown up to something that simply wasn't there. There are numerous documents by close collaborators that can tell you that mostly he just seemed unhinged.

>>9244144
* they're

>>9243857
i have a degree in history and 2 years no job

>>9244144
>There are numerous documents by close collaborators that can tell you that mostly he just seemed unhinged.
I'd bet there are even more documents by close collaborators attesting to his genius. Goebbels called his rhetoric "otherworldly".
His reputation as a 10/10 public speaker is hardly debated, in my experience.

>>9244184
he was just all shouty

>>9244255
That's because you're a retarded anglo who can't understand what he's saying.

>>9243857
I have a PHD in English literature and work for min. wage.

36 years old and tired to death of life.

I am so so tired

>>9244184
>His reputation as a 10/10 public speaker is hardly debated
That's because post-war retards wanted to pretend he made the Germans do all those horrible things with magic charisma rather than that a plurality if not a majority of them actually just sincerely wanted it.

You can find speeches of his to listen to right now on the internet for free, they're not very impressive. They're not exactly bad, but there's nothing special about them.

Also
>Goebbels
I hope you realize as propaganda minister it was his job to make Hitler seem as awesome as possible.

File: bookshelf.jpg (4MB, 2112x2816px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 2112x2816px

>>9243732
not an argument hehehe

>>9244429
minimum wage? with a doctorate?