Bad Philosophy

my diary desu

L. Ron Hubbard if that counts

Icycalm

>>9244469
Sterner, unironically

>>9244469
JK Rowling

>>9244469
Most of the ancient Greeks.

Wittgenstein

>>9244469
Aristotle
thats the main one

>>9244469
Perhaps Wittgenstein's early work and Alain de Botton is the cringiest I can think of. Some essays written by Gilbert Ryle makes me think an eight year old wrote them for him.

Stefan Molyneux

William Lane Craig and A.J.Ayer makes me worried about what Universities accept as higher education.

Judith Butler

>>9244477
Icycalm is out of his mind and an admitted criminal (wire fraud).

>>9244480

the misspelling pings one's troll radar, but it's reasonable to suppose that were referring to Stirner, in which case you are wrong.

>>9244475
>>9244477
>>9244551

These are good posts, and wholly relevant to what the OP was asking for.

>>9244589

Your rhetorical wish to dismiss Ayer puts the lie to your post. You ought instead to worry about things like lesbian basket weaving and "communications".

File: The_Truth_About_Bitcoin_Stefan_Molyneux__FreeDomainRadio__15812-750x400.jpg (32KB, 750x400px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 750x400px

YO!

>>9244617
this. The women is a talentless hack that could not write even if her life depended on it

>>9244469
all of them

File: brand name.jpg (16KB, 214x317px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 214x317px

Did someone mention me?

>>9244551
Been reading Benjamin Jowetts translations of the Platonic dialogues (even the ones of questionable origin) over the holidays, and this is accurate. Aristotles own writing which is for the most part a reactionary critique of Platos work is based on a fundamental misunderstanding of his central concepts, namely the question of what ideas are and what dialogue does.

>>9244639
literally nothing wrong with being a criminal

>>9244551
kys

>>9244564
This is probably the best answer as far as contemporary philosophers.

>>9244922

that guy is not a contemporary philosopher though. He's just some dude with a youtube.

>>9244902
Tell me how aristotle misunderstood plato's forms.

>>9244469
Derrida

>>9244902
If Aristotle misunderstood Plato then there is no hope for the rest of us

Hegel.

>>9245202
>he doesn't know about UPB
http://www.fdrliberated.com/stefan-molyneux-promise-failure-upb-inside-story-part-1/

>>9245261
porphyry and plotinus did ok
Aristotle went off on his own merry but errant way; thankfully there's an entire school of thought dedicated solely to the teachings of Plato that you can draw material from, and that's not even to mention the early Christian writers.

>>9244922
>kys
thanks for the insightful post, feel free to make a redaction at any point.

>>9244469
>whose thoughts were utterly inane
Evola
Savitri Devi

>>9245463
Damn, I forgot Sam Harris.

File: b63c2b301d612489ee568d644ef26e72.jpg (16KB, 217x320px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 217x320px

>>9245463
>Evola

How dare you.

>no ayn rand mentioned yet

Descartes
Sam Harris
>>9245463
Why was Devi insane? What is the problem with the post-modern right?

>>9244902
>>9244551
I really think that you're misreading Aristotle if you think this is the case. Any form of radical critique or departure from a previously established philosophical systen requires some form of "distortion" in the part of the person critiquing or departing from the previously established philosophy. Its not due to any form of intellectual dishonesty, however. Rather, it is simply due to the fact that ideas that are taken out their respective systems and evaluated on a new system will by necessity sound implausible as it is being evaluated through a radically different method compared to the original one. On the other hand, their evaluations of other philosophers who are similar to them in doctrine often leads to equally new and radical insights regarding the other philosopher's work. An example I read somewhere was that Kant was a horrible interpreter of Plato (as he evaluated Plato through his own radically different system) but a wonderful interpreter of Rousseau (as Rousseau positively influenced Kant). I would like to note that I am not too familiar with Kant's work, so take this example with a grain of salt. However, a professor who I very much respect gave this example to me so I would have to take his word on it for now.

Basically, any form of departure from one's philosophical teacher requires a "distortion" of their ideas due to the new system established.

There is also the problem of how critique makes differences more obvious than similarities, but thats another topic.

>>9245202
>He's just some dude with a youtube.
What qualifications are needed for you to consider someone a philosopher?

File: ayn_rand_pepe.png (104KB, 879x499px) Image search: [Google]

104KB, 879x499px

>>9245521

>>9245531
Well she thought Hitler was the final avatar of Vishnu for one thing.

>>9245696
So? The only fault with that, is that Germany fell before anything global could be done, so it does not work.

>>9244469
>Is there an example of a self-important "philosopher" whose thoughts were utterly inane?
Marx

>>9244469
Heidegger

File: 51CE1FGPJaL._SX316_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg (43KB, 318x499px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 318x499px

>>9244469
One of Wittgenstein's earlier influences was impressively bad /r9k/ dosed with Wiseau tier philosophy.

File: IMG_2049.jpg (202KB, 1024x752px) Image search: [Google]

202KB, 1024x752px

>>9244469
Diogenes

B A R R E L B O Y Z

>>9245704
>So?
So that's fucking nuts.

NEETzsche.

>>9245837
Why? Why are you on /lit/ if you don't understand using analogies to study history a certain way?

>>9245846
It's not an analogy.

She literally thought Hitler was the final avatar of Vishnu.

Utterly insane? Probably some new age "I spoke with the aliens on dmt" philosopher I suppose, other than that I wouldn't call even the worst philosophers I disagree with most "utterly insane" or anywhere close to the autism of the room

>>9245859
No she didn't. You don't understand right-wing post modernism. You types can only identify it when it's thrown in your face, like with this 'alt-right' nonsense.

Do you sincerely believe that they believe that KEK is a real being that is controlling everything, and has appointed them as a HEGELIAN DIALECTIC against the SJWS AND JEWS? To create enough MEME MAGIC to self-actualize himself through his avatar TRUMP and usher in a new world order starting with THE DAY OF THE ROPE?

File: IMG_2210.jpg (43KB, 590x350px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 590x350px

>>9245859
>The last avatar appears as man with a white horse

>>9245875
I'm pretty sure some of them do believe that

>>9245271

>>9245875
>they believe that KEK is a real being that is controlling everything, and has appointed them as a HEGELIAN DIALECTIC against the SJWS AND JEWS? To create enough MEME MAGIC to self-actualize himself through his avatar TRUMP and usher in a new world order starting with THE DAY OF THE ROPE?

alt-right here. I sincerely believe all of that.

>>9245875
She did though. She explicitly says this in final chapter of 'The Lightning and the Sun'.

http://www.savitridevi.org/lightning-16.html

It's not like she wasn't a real Hindu who didn't actually believe in esoteric cosmic forces.

>post-modernism
I don't think you understand regular post-modernism because it's not about saying wacky new-age shit.

>>9244469
Theres a fucking board appart just for those topics god damn

>>9244469

Stirner and Schopenhauer.

Both had good facets to their philosophies and don't warrant outright dismissing but they are meme philosophers for a reason.

>>9245896

Read the OP again and tell me you honestly think it's fair to say that about schopenhauer.

I've only read the world as will and representation and on the fourfold root of the principle of sufficient reason from Schopenhauer, but both those works seemed very intelligent and well thought-out to me, I think his philosophy laid out in the world as will and rep is very close to correct, besides the vital force stuff

I know schope has some more edgy stuff so maybe that's why you think he's a meme, or maybe it's his whole eastern thing, but I don't think you can compare him to the room

Never read any stirner though so idk

>>9245633
im the original guy and the difference is Plato was wise and insightful and left the weird prescriptive shit for the end of his career, whereas Aristotle's whole carrer is patently untrue prescriptive garbage. A tremendous thinker who did a lot of leg work, but left behind nothing of actual value. He's a point of historical interest, unlike Plato who is a Philosopher.

We wrestle with Plato to this day, we only think of Aristotle as some mystic forerunner.

Oh, Ayn Rand.

>>9244469

Hooks, Butler, Rand and Molyneux

>>9245928
"On Women"

>>9244469
tj kirk
sam harris
peter hitchens
richard dawkins

>>9244469
Yes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=drcseH-7hpw

>>9245939
Usually people would claim its Plato that was the mystic. I don't get mystic vibes at all from Aristotle. Don't get me wrong, I much prefer Plato than Aristotle but I don't think Aristotle is poor philosopher and I noted that the criticisms that Aristotle gives about Plato can blind us to see the similarities between the two. In a sense, enjoying one pretty much entails the enjoyment of the other, imho.

Also, the view of the "prescriptive" area of Plato that he wrote "later in his career" has been pretty much abandoned by modern day scholarship after exposing thos type of interpretation as based on faulty stylometric analysis. Of course Plato wrote some dialogues later but this does not imply an evolution of doctrine or a movement from Socrates to his own philosophy. Plato was prescriptive from the very start, its just that the dialogue leads one naturally into it.

Finally, Aristotle scholarship is also very much alive and well and interesting work is being done trying to think about why Aristotle uses contradictions. Some argue that it is sloppy philosophy while others argue that it serves a pedagogical function for the readers, similar to the Platonic dialogue but also radically different.

>>9245961

Stupid roastie

>>9246017
I mostly agree with it I'm just saying that it is probably why shcopey was mentioned

>>9244665
I hate his face and demeanour so much... Fuck.

>>9244649
a stirnerfag hates philosophers who have actually made an impact to civilization. typical kek

>>9245704
Mouth breathing NEETs must leave.
>>>/trash/

The next level pseud, Bernard-Henri Lévy.

>>9245254
From the individual dialogues you might get the idea that Plato thinks that ideas are abstract concepts which occupy their own realm in our reality, and that every particular we come into contact with is a variation of such an idea. As humans, we have the true nature of ideas etched into the waxboard of our souls because we're being reincarnated over and over again. The platonic dialogue brings that pre-natal knowledge back to light and helps us to establish the objective, eternal truth of any given subject. Which is to say that the platonic dialogue serves the purpose of establishing that truth, once and for all.

The problem with this reading is that it is directly contradicted by Parmenides as well as the way other dialogues play out. Parmenides is the one dialogue Socrates can really be said to have lost. He is unable to defend the existence of abstract forms or prove that reality corresponds to anything of the sort. The fact is that the concept is full of contradictions and no matter what kinds of terms he uses to explain them away they just crop back up in different places. Now, this is not a live debate that Socrates lost without meaning to and Plato turned into a dialogue. He's trying to tell his readers something, - namely that the idea that everything can be fitted into neat little cathegories does not hold up to scrutiny. We don't know that such cathegories even exist - though acting like they don't just leads us to be unable to make judgements about anything whatsoever, making it a pretty useless approach to knowledge.

The purpose of a Platonic dialogue then is the unraveling of the inner contradictions of our current system of thought and language. That understanding is the basis for its further developement. The purpose is to help us to get as close as we can to an ultimate transcendental truth (of questionable nature) which, given that contradictions will always reappear in a different place, we may infer might be ultimately unreachable.

TL;DR Plato is not a naive idealist. He truly believes that he does not know anything.

>>9245875
Yes.

>>9244469
dühring lol

German Idealism

File: 315956.jpg (197KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

197KB, 1920x1080px

>>9246349
>The problem with this reading is that it is directly contradicted by Parmenides as well as the way other dialogues play out.

No friend. The late period is filled with metaphysics that the earlier periods are just different from, you cannot cherry pick a late period dialogue, especially Parmenides, and then say you understand why this or that perspective on Plato is right or wrong.

>The fact is that the concept is full of contradictions

So is Parmenides entire monologue in that dialogue. I cant be bothered to bring it up but no one agrees on what Parmenides is saying

>>9246349
>>9246005
>>9245939
>>9245891
>>9244551
>all this Aristotle hate paired with love of Plato

It should be noted that Aristotle is the father of Logic, and Plato is not. Where Plato failed in trying to create a system of dialectic, his Diairesis, Aristotle succeeded in discovering deductive logic, which is clearly what Plato sought after when attempting to understand the framework of language and definition, which is also where I think Plato is at his best.

>>9245977
lol don't you need charisma to start a cult?

Late Wittgenstein is great, the Tractatus is pure, unadulturated autism. So ridiculously self-important and so incredibly wrong it's hilarious.

>>9245939
>we only think of Aristotle as some mystic forerunner
A lot of what aristotle wrote in the politics is still relevant today. From what I have read of the two, I enjoyed aristotle more and found it to be more useful.

Michel Foucault is pretty terrible. But then I guess he can pass for some kind of genius among 100 / 110 IQ folks.

>>9246520

LW is my - a Hegel fanatic's - guilty pleasure.

Nietzsche. Objectively.

>>9244469
Sam Harris

>naming a well regarded philosopher
>>9244551
>>9245260
>>9245271
>>9245531
>>9245718
>>9245845
>>9245891
>>9245896
>>9246382
>>9246559
>>9247083
Literally basic reading comprehension. This is not a "philosophers I don't like" thread.

>>9247102
Neetcheese Objectively fits ops description

File: 1489675794055.png (76KB, 402x357px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 402x357px

>>9244469
If you want to read bad philosophy just read ANYTHING wrote by a feminist.
Its always pathetic drivel about perceived victimhood, grand delusions about secret (men)societies, penis envy and an utopia that even on paper already sounds like hell.

>>9247108
Nietzsche was pretty self-important and crazy. But his philosophy was by no means bad like The Room.

>>9245836
This, his only legacy was that he pissed Plato off

>>9244475
L Ron Hubbard was a black man
his real name was L. Ron Hoyabembe

>>9247339
TURN THAT POOP INTO WINE

>>9245875
>Savitri Devi
>post-modern
just like sam hyde

>>9246520
How is it wrong?

ayn rand

most mystics

cult leaders, occult stuff..

>>9244469

Epicurus
Ayn Rand

>>9245681
Probably some kind of unique viewpoint seperate from all the others. All molymeme does is parrot what other philosophers say.

It's Stirner. The only philosophical point he ever made was, unironically, "just be yourself". The definition of inanity.

File: Mary_Wollstonecraft_by_John_Opie_%28c._1797%29.jpg (319KB, 1020x1244px) Image search: [Google]

319KB, 1020x1244px

You've gotta be on some next level feminism to think otherwise.

>>9244564
This desu.

I'd also say sargon if I thought he were a philosopher and not a news-regurgitator/Russian psyop agent

>>9245260
delet

Baudrillard tbqh
Edgar Morin too