explain

>>9814026
Hobbes: life in a state of nature is nasty, brutish, and short, so we need a state to curb our all too human proclivities
Rosseau: muh noble savage
Freud: trauma, alienation, separation, repetition compulsion, and sexual desire

>>9814026

Unconscious drives.
Repression and desire.
Eros und Thanatos.
Hideaki Anno.

We must first consider the historicity of spongeous matter in relation to these three fine gentlemen. In 333 when Hobbes first carved in cuneiform the Magna Carta he had in mind a way to cross the Manche. "Sponge!" he exclaimed with the power of ten Zeuses, 6 Ave Maria and 12 little niggers. To attain sponge in that era, one had to look for the magnifice Homo Spongerectus which prompted him to write "The Leviathan" in which he outlined his plan to build a gigantic waterbeast made out of these spongy individuals which will be used to cross the channel. Rousseau, another fine gentleman, who lived in 1666 when Hobbes leviathan was finally finished fought to release the sponyfers from the class conflict they were entangled in by forces outside their control. He succeded and sponges were were, but OH NO. Years in captivity made the spongies docile little women. At round this time, one of the spongy women, Dora went to consult the great crabtacular autistrian psychoanalfucker fruid who lent her his watch and they all danced in the sun and we realized the fault in our stars. The End

>>9814026

Hobbes thinks that people are inherently malevolent and that the state is the only reason people behave.
Rousseau thinks that people are inherently good and that the state only causes suffering and oppression.
Freud has no direct relation to this dialogue and is only included for the sake of "completing" the meme and giving a false impression.

>>9814026
Opinions masked as philosophy doesn't count as a respectable view on human nature
All are wrong, horrible so, humans are a mixture of these ideas

>>9814099
This.

>>9814286

Wow I sure wish I had studied mathematics so I too could understand this rather funny meme!

>>9814099
Freud links societial matters to sexuality all the time, and in fact says that our drives are all sexual in their nature. It is still about the relationship between human nature and society.
It is a progression that ends in exhageration: a brute for Hobbes, a innocent child for Rousseau and a BDSM voyeurist for Freud. It's funny and it fits.

>>9814298

This is a very strained effort.
Hobbes and Rousseau exist in direct opposition. They are two sides of one coin.
It's a dialogue that exists utterly independent of Freud. His inclusion in the chart is incoherent.

>>9814311
This is the exageration. 2 different coins, and then something that goes beyond the coin in one single hit, which is literally what happened once Freud's idea of human nature went mainstream. That collective radical shift is of course referenced by the explicit choice of Krab's clothes.

>>9814311
That is why the Hobbes Spongebob and the Rousseau Spongebob are right next to each other, while the Freud Mr. Krabs is below them, separate. It`s an extra, like "this person thought society could be seen from this perspective as well but it's not as related to the other interpretations above are to each other specifically."

>>9814386
>>9814358
>>9814311
>>9814298
>>9814099

You guys made a mistake: you inserted society into this equation because that guy did so at first. Yet this is never implied in the picture itself, which deals only with human nature. So we go from primitive egoism to childlike purity to oversexualization, covering this way the 3 main macro-conceptions of human consciousness of the last 300 years.

>>9814358

Literally don't know what you're trying to say.

>>9814386

Yes, it's an extra, i.e. it's totally superfluous.
You could also throw a bunch of other shit in there that has nothing to do with the Hobbes-Rousseau dialectic too. That's my fucking point dumbass.

>>9814413
>You guys made a mistake: you inserted society into this equation because that guy did so at first. Yet this is never implied in the picture itself, which deals only with human nature

Jesus Christ the sheer stupidity of /lit/ is honestly going to kill me. This is the dumbest board I've ever been on bar none.
It's political philosophy genius.
Hobbes wrote a defense of monarchy and Rousseau's book it LITERALLY called "The Social Contract."

>>9814421
I thought your point was 1. It is superfluous and 2. It is not funny and shouldn't be there. I'm saying it is an extra (i.e. superfluous) but fits well due to the reasons I've just provided, making it funny and thus validating its place with the other two images.

Actually a pretty good thread for such a shit image

>>9814433
Hobbes and Rousseau wrote about politics, but this comics takes in consideration only their notions of human nature. It's written up there, can't you read? You are the one who is inserting the political narrative into that picture.

File: tomas.png (12KB, 154x385px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 154x385px

>>9814536
This image turned out to be a thousand times more complex than I expected coming into this thread.

>>9814567
Imagine what would happen if people on /lit/ actually analyzed literature, and if people on /ic/ actually analyzed paintings. I guess only memes are at level as low as ours.

>>9814099
Who should've been there instead of Freud?

>>9814592
I always thought /ic/ was more for specifically drawing than painting.
Now imagine if we had a board for general arts like for discussing theatre, musicals, and opera already for fucks sake I've been waiting a decade.

>>9814597
Marx, I guess.
Freud is fine too really, his outlook on human nature has become one of the most popular ones in human history.

Someone please expand the meme using other thinkers.