/lit/ - Literature

>>14087022
Houllebecq depressed me pretty hard.

>>14087025
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kgjkth6BRRY

>>14087022
Anytime, anytime when I see a Schopenhauer picture on /lit/ a boiling rage rises within me. HE ISENT A FUCKING MEME KEK SAD PHILOSOPHER HE ACTUALLY REVISED AND BTFOED SOME OF KANT'S STUFF IN HIS UNI THESIS. HE ISENT CIORAN WITH ACADEMIC CREDIT. HE HAS ACTUAL FUCKING PHILOSOPHICAL MERIT. FUCK EVERYONE ONE OF YOU THAT READ THE SHITTY FUCKING NIGGER PENGUIN BOOK AND THEN CLAIM TO HAVE READ HIM AND COME ON HERE AND SHIT POST FUCKK YOUUU

>>14087053
Great men are bound to be misunderstood by man. It's alright.

>>14087022
I can't believe you'd start the thread off with Schopenhauer in the OP. His ideas about suicide and moral freedom were pretty refreshing.

>>14087053
>praising soap and shower

>>14087033
based

>>14087138
>His ideas about suicide and moral freedom were pretty refreshing.
I loved that too, here's "On Suicide" for anons who might be interesting:
https://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/s/schopenhauer/arthur/pessimism/chapter3.html
one of the best essays on suicide I've read

>>14087053
He was a crazy fuck who thought that the physical world is an illusion and all that really exists is a blind inexorable cosmic will, I would say his meme status is well secured.

>>14087187
>This is all the more striking, inasmuch as neither in the Old nor in the New Testament is there to be found any prohibition or positive disapproval of it;
And what about the "Thou shalt not kill"? Doesn't this include yourself?

>>14087559
So did a lot of other philosophers, it’s called idealism you dimwit

>>14087856
Yeah I wouldn't consider suicide murder. Even something seemingly transparent like "Thou shalt not kill" has room for intepretation: killing in war, killing in self-defence, killing within the context of the judicial system is all allowed. It's conceivable for suicide to be an exception, but I'm neither Christian nor an expert on the Old Testament so I'd rather others chime in

>>14087022
Nietzsche, Glad I'm a stoic. I'm more successful and confident when I read the stoics.
Nietzscheans are people who thinks they're better than other people when they're just losers IRL like Nietzsche.

>>14088012
Imagine praising stoicism, hope you are baiting or you just took your first baby steps into philosophy and stoicism serves you as a barrier.

>>14088109
hey anon, porhaps instead of accusing of bait and mocking the boi you should point them towards more nuanced reading

>>14088109
Imagine believing what /lit/ contradicts. Maybe you should learn about non-conformity.

>>14088140
What's in there for me? Why would i ever do that?

>>14087022
Fuck that. I’ll say the most uplifting: Spinoza, Leibniz, Hume, Kant and Hegel.

>>14087187
Thanks anon, how do I give you Reddit Gold?

>>14088145
>Arguing based on his own assumptions and no facts at his disposal
you really are a brainlet, aren't you?

>>14088146
to be helpful and/or enlightening to another person instead of simply making their day a little worse

>>14087875
That's not what idealism means. And Schopenhauer is quite an exception in this regard. You need to go back to plotnimus to find some vaguely similar memery in the west.

>>14088150
>R-R-EBBBBIIT

>>14088158
Not everyone in this world has to be enlightened, don't you think?
Plus the anon seems at least to know what he is able to grasp and doesn't ask for more. If that's stoicism then bravo, three times bravo!

>>14088210
two good points
i think what i was really going for was the whole "you get out what you put in" idea. wouldn't it be nice to know that you helped someone else discover something they didn't know they would enjoy?

>>14088210
Just like every Nietzschean. He thinks he is better than people. I hope you're not being ironic.

>>14088149
Where to start with hegel

Seneca.
>>14088012
>Nietzscheans are people who think they're better than other people when they're just losers IRL like Nietzsche.
ousted by yourself
>>14088109
There's this widespread belief that one needs to adapt and evolve or something when it's all about suitability of philosophy to his nature; how do you explain when one read the core and more of pre-structuralist continental philosophy and far more than what's essential of analytic philosophy that he's still after all that a stoic?

>>14088379
Inferior nature, either too depressive, pathetic and sad in general or too lazy, probably all of them together.

>>14087022
Leopardi

>>14088149
Hegel is depressive.

>>14087856
If I'm not mistaken, the phrase "Thou shall not kill" is mistranslated from Greek sources. It's found as "Thou shall not murder" in the Hebrew of the Torah. Which I think is intuitive -- for most of human history, even up to now since the Bible we've had to kill animals to survive. Would be a bit cheeky if simply the very act of surviving was a sin.

>>14088518
is this paperback really 2.5k pages? can you show the spine please?

>>14088853
Yes, 2592 pages

Cioran.
start with his older stuff
on the heights of despair

>>14087022
Baudrillard

Bataille
Cioran

>>14087053
Schop is completely based. If I were an atheist I'd think Schopenhauer was right about everything. I don't know why people cling to neet when he could barely handle Schop despite stealing so much from him. FYI without even trying to Schopenhauer btfo meme Stirnier and his spooky egoism.

>>14088750
Shut up and read your Hegel without any leftist bullshit incorporated & internalized

Pessoa

>>14087022
That has to be Gottlob Frege. He wanted me to turn into a calculator but I refused. But then my philosophy teacher locked me up with him throwing identity statements at me which I could not resist. He fried my brain and now I'm in the third realm posting on /lit/.

FREGE RUINED MY LIFE

>>14087875
I never said Schopenhauer was the only crazy fuck around

>>14087559
Holy fuck imagine thinking the physical world ISN'T an illusion. Get a load of this absolute retard.

>>14090174
Take your meds or make an argument

I recommend the former

>>14090187
Learn how to conceptualize upper dimensions. Take calculus i-iii it will help. Current theory states that there are as many as 14 dimensions. If you think this simple 3 dimensional space is the end all be all you're either fucking retarded or a complete ignoramus. Google flatland to start.

>>14090198
>>14090198
I asked you for an argument in support for the thesis of the physical world being an illusion, whether there are 4 or 44 dimensions is irrelevant.

Probably Kant because he spent all this time perfecting a system and he lived his life so rigidly, but his work is completely worthless except to criticize and nobody actually reads his magnum opus.

Hegel with knowledge of history since

>>14089365
That's because Theists like it when atheist philosophers are pessimists because it fits in well with the religious position that life is meaningless without God. You would like Schopenhauer to be right because you want atheism to be a depressive philosophy to validate your belief in the superiority of Theism. So don't pretend that you like Schopenhauer because you consider him a great philosopher, you like him because it reassures your shitty strawman against atheism.

>>14090221
Do what I said retard. You have no concept of higher dimensions.

>>14087559
Wait... you don't mean to tell me... you mean to say you actually think... no, it couldn't be... surely you're not suggesting the physical world isn't an illusion... are you?

>>14087022
All of philosophy is trash, it has absolutely no value whatsoever.
It's all just ramblings of unimportant people who have been deemed as important for memetic reasons.

>>14090284
Well, its kinda a forgone conclusion in athiesm. Either that or ambivolentness. Im in the later, though agnostic.

>>14090405
You best start believing in philosophy...

You're in one

>>14090472
wym ?

>>14090486
Modern western philosophy is humanism and has been for 100 years. It is accepted as religious level in tenant and must be so for our international society to function. It is inescapable. Within it the two at odds subphilosophies are liberal humanism or the individual as the highest and social humanism or the group as highest. That is the right vs the left politically right now but both sides are under the umbrella of humanism overall.

>>14090509
Pre-humanist philosophy is just projecting humanity onto a divine.

>>14090509
Doesn't change the fact that it's all just bullshit.

>>14090530
You seem like you'd enjoy getting into math.

>>14090569
Yes i do like maths.

>>14090596
Math is fucking cool man.

>>14090627
I appreciate all the cleverness that went into it, but i'm not convinced the technological progress it spawned is very beneficial

>>14090636
Man, what's cool about math is that it's discovered not invented. If you want to talk about technology you're going to need to get into chemistry and materials which is also super fucking cool.

>>14090226
>nobody actually reads his magnum opus.
brainlet: the post

>>14087559
If you think the "physical" world is an actual thing, you my friend, aren't mental, but you are really dumb

>>14087559
AAHAHAHAHA HOLY SHIT. DUDE ARE YOU A FUCKING NAIVE DIRECT MATERIALIST? AAHAHAHA DUDE I WOULD BEAT THE FUCK OUT OF YOU IF I EVER MET YOUR FAGGOT ASS LMAO

It sucks being a fan of Nietzsche. He attracts all the retards and people will always view you as either a edgy atheist teen who just got into philosophy and/or "Muh Race" dimwits. There's nothing you can really do to change that opinion either. You just have to roll with the punches

>>14090791
First off, can you see a big button on the left side of your keyboard? It's the fourth from the top. Press it once.

Secondly, "Direct materialism" isn't even a name for a philosophical position. There is Direct Realism, and there is Materialism, but there is not Direct Materialism.

Also neither you or any of your fuckbuddies has offered any argument as to why the physical world is an illusion. The closest you got is that anon making vague remarks about parallel dimensions. Not that I'm surprised, since you probably intuitively realize that all arguments for idealism are utter shit and you are afraid I will skullfuck you if we have an argument.

>>14088518
how is that? would you recommend it?

>>14090420
No it isn't. It's a Christian Apologist strawman based on a fallacy of ambiguity. Just because there is not an objective purpose of the universe it doesn't follow that people lose the purposes they individually have. It's a terrible argument.

>>14091593
I don't think that's the point and that's kind of a strawman in of itself. You keep saying strawman yet you're the one that's whipping out all these arguments nobody here has made.

>>14091625
No that's exactly their point. Here is an example of the strawman in action:
https://edwardfeser.blogspot.com/2016/06/adventures-in-old-atheism-part-i.html
>As if the vast majority of human beings would not find the implications of atheism -- that human existence has no purpose, that there is no postmortem reward to counterbalance the sufferings of this life, nor any hope for seeing dead loved ones again, etc. -- far more depressing than any purported deficiencies in traditional religious belief.

Of course, denying that humans have an objective purpose in a cosmic sense doesn't entail that the purposes we individually hold somehow disappear. But thts what he is implying here because otherwise his allegation that Atheism makes human life meaningless wouldn't make sense.

>>14090028
Then I must read. I ruined my life today just thinking about life. Not my life, lthough tht sucks more and more too, but of the nature of no absolute truth.

>>14087022
Wwyd.

>>14090028
Te fregaste jaja

>>14091729
Based