[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 17 KB, 338x500, 41GgWB1452L.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16797685 No.16797685 [Reply] [Original]

*refutes Nietzsche*
*obliterates rightoids*
*vindicates socialism, empathy and altruism*
Read it and you'll wonder how a chud pseud like Nietzsche was ever taken seriously in philosophy, even his critique of religion is kindergarten tier compared to Chad Marx's scientific materialist analysis

>> No.16797691

>>16797685
Sir, we found the slave morality

>> No.16797693

>>16797685
here is your pity (you)
spend it wisely, for it is the only one you will get unless this board is truly lost

>> No.16797695

>>16797685
>vindicates empathy and altruism
Damn, I'm not sure I can believe the author accomplished such a feat.

>> No.16797730

>>16797685
>Chad Marx's scientific materialist analysis
>scientific
>materialist
>analysis
Why do Marxists pretend they practice something methodical, open minded, and empirical when they actually just lock themselves into assumptions and confirmation biases and pretend the culdesac of Marxist hermeneutics is all one needs to know?

Wouldn't a truly scientific, materialist analysis of history actually want to be open to being completely wrong about its fundamental assumptions and abstractions, in order to find ones that achieve better and better descriptive and predictive abilities?

It's almost as if genuine curiosity and scientific progress wasn't the real goal.

>> No.16797735

>>16797685
Bullshit disregarded debunks this.

>> No.16797804

>>16797730
>Wouldn't a truly scientific, materialist analysis of history actually want to be open to being completely wrong about its fundamental assumptions and abstractions, in order to find ones that achieve better and better descriptive and predictive abilities?
materialist analysis works, this is why most people in academia adhere to it.

what doesn't work is the destruction of the bankers who keep people poor materially .

If marxists were wrong, bankers would not try so hard to enslave the workers and feminists.

>> No.16797849

>>16797804
>materialist analysis works, this is why most people in academia adhere to it.
Right, that's why Marx is regarded as a non-entity in the field of economics.

>> No.16797871

>>16797849
This. Man's a fortunate teller who tried to predict the future and failed, his whole 'solution' to a problem he didn't even identify correctly rests on a failed prediction of what is now our past. Why anyone would anyone bother with him beyond acknowledging his analysis as somewhat unique for his time I will never know.

>> No.16798429

Only by ‘reading like a loser’ and failing to live up to his ideals can we move beyond Nietzsche to a still more radical revaluation of all values—a subhumanism that expands the boundaries of society until we are left with less than nothing in common. Anti-Nietzsche is a subtle and subversive engagement with Nietzsche and his twentieth-century interpreters—Heidegger, Vattimo, Nancy, and Agamben. Written with economy and clarity, it shows how a politics of failure might change what it means to be human.

>> No.16798957

>>16797685
>BULL
ok this checks out

>> No.16799012
File: 122 KB, 1356x668, God.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16799012

The Bible already obliterates Nietzsche, I don't need your Godless communism.

>> No.16799105

>>16798429
>subhumanism
Lmao. Why would anyone want to adhere to a philosophy with a name like that

>> No.16799115
File: 1.51 MB, 640x640, Bear home invasion.webm [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16799115

>>16797871
it's funny how Spengler just completely disregards any pretense of being scientific but nonetheless manages to be surprisingly accurate, while Marx does the exact opposite and gets his predictions wrong.

>> No.16799179

>>16797685
>Malcolm BVLL
Nietzsche didnt stand a chance

>> No.16800309

>>16797685
Oh my god, some fag wrote a book about NIETZSCHE how will the right ever recover! I can't believe it! ahhhhhh!

>> No.16800521

>>16797685
>scientific
lmao
If the author's thesis is that Nietzsche is a natsoc or a proto natsoc or a fascist or tries to identify him with any political posture he is retarded. Nietzsche isnt systematic, you cant put him in a political posture without there being something in his writings that goes agaisnt it.
Right wingers who think Nietzsche would agree with him are just as retarded.
If you think Nietzsche is a nazi remember you are thinking in the same or a similar way nazis think.

>> No.16800544

>>16799115
All of Marx’s predictions are pretty spot on when you view capitalism globally and not nationally.

>> No.16800569

>>16797685
>Only by ‘reading like a loser’ and failing to live up to his ideals can we move beyond Nietzsche to a still more radical revaluation of all values—a subhumanism that expands the boundaries of society until we are left with less than nothing in common.
lmao subhuman loser

>>16797804
>bankers would not try so hard to enslave the workers and feminists.
>and feminists
what ahahahah

>> No.16800571

>>16800544
Exactly, only trouble is the nation state still exists as the primary form of political unity, and doesn't seem to be going anywhere any time soon.

>> No.16800605

Whomstvd are some non cringe marxists who actually understand Nietzsche

>> No.16800627

>>16800605
Sorel and Adorno are the only non-cringe Marxists and incidentally they both got Nietzsche right

>> No.16800666

>>16800627
Adorno is pretty cringe sometimes imo. Seems like the boomer of the frankfurt gang.

>> No.16800704

>>16800666
won't argue with the devilish trips but to me he's the least cringe of the Frankfurters

>> No.16801922

read max scheler's ressentiment instead

>> No.16802014

>>16797730
>Why do Marxists pretend they practice something methodical, open minded, and empirical when they actually just lock themselves into assumptions and confirmation biases and pretend the culdesac of Marxist hermeneutics is all one needs to know?
Because 90% of them are too stupid to do math. I'm dead serious, most marxists don't touch the stuff and just prefer to jerk off to useless and outdated philosophy books.

I'm a PhD in econ (big mistake, don't fall for this meme) and it's absolutely hilarious how many people can't even understand a simple graph or equation explaining our robust theories and prefer to just wallow in the nonsense of someone who had no actual working model for his grand plan of collectivism.

>> No.16802041

>>16797804
>If marxists were wrong, bankers would not try so hard to enslave the workers and feminists.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAH oh man. This is /x/-tier schizo babbling but you actually think it's an educated opinion.

>> No.16802049

>>16800544
His theories on labor value and trade are dead wrong. There are no working marxian economic models. Every single major contributor to the field currently--Solow, Keynes, Friedman (in some circles) agree that his ideas are totally worthless.

>> No.16802080

>>16797730
>Why do Marxists pretend they practice something methodical, open minded, and empirical when they actually just lock themselves into assumptions and confirmation biases and pretend the culdesac of Marxist hermeneutics is all one needs to know?

If they were truly materialists they would sing their praise for the incels

>> No.16802096

>>16802080
Based

>> No.16802110

>>16802014
I feel like PhD's in general are a meme, unless you want to continue in academia.

>> No.16802177

>>16797685
>scientific
Imagine calling a work of philosophy scientific like it's a good thing. Embarrassing.

>> No.16803441

bump

>> No.16805465

>>16799012
Nietzche is not for communism moron

>> No.16805529

>>16800544
The predictions Marx made that were spot on were made by all Ricardian and classical economists. What specified Marx were things like the Law of the Tendency of the Profit Rate to Fall (always spelled by devout marxists the capitals) that are empirically false, a labour theory of value that predicted unequal profit rates between industries and thus had to be "corrected" by another model of prices in the volume III that essentially makes value theory useless, a prediction of catastrophic crisis that never happened, a prediction of worsening worker's conditions and the iron law of wages that was wrong as well, and empty claims of the superior productivity of socialism eventhough he never concieved a concrete model of this superior socialist mode of production and nothing like that has ever been empirically realized either. No, really, the balance sheet is pretty disheartening.

>> No.16805640

>>16797685
>Chad Marx
I mean, what can I say? I just feel sorry for you.

>> No.16805671

>>16805529
I'm no communist but socialism is not here yet we and the warzaw pact countries might have espoused it however when Marx spoke about it he meant that economic form which will evolve from capitalism in the west

Nick lands accelerationism and libertarianism are the most orthodox Marxist theories

>> No.16805677

>>16797685
To stop believing in Marx's scientific materialism you just need to consume LSD

>> No.16806185

>>16797685
anyone can refute Nietzsche. how about refuting your mom.

>> No.16806199
File: 33 KB, 599x540, a0481039.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16806199

>>16797685
*squats down*
*parts ass cheeks*
*lets out slight gas*
*bescumbers you*
How do you like that, faggot?

>> No.16807429

>>16799115
Very true that about Spengler.

>> No.16807462

>>16805677
Acid trips are just materialist dialectics for 9 hours

>> No.16807467

>>16805529
Don't forget
>infinite gains to labor (lol)
>sharply diminishing gains to capital (lol)
>global communist revolution before 1910
>the labor theory of value (lol)

>>16807429
>>16799115
The difference between Spengler and Marx is that Spengler autistically dove into history, and made theories to attempt to explain phenomena that he observed. Marx came up with end goals and states that he wanted, made theories to justify them, and then sort of handwaved away historical evidence because the Capitalists already knew this stuff and were hiding the evidence.

>> No.16807494

>>16797804
They didn't HAVE to work hard to enslave feminists you retard, they just subverted 2nd Wave and made it into a tool of wage suppression. Since then women have meticulously enslaved themselves and dragged men down with them in the name of agency they don't actually have.

>> No.16807540

I can’t believe all you have to do is ramble and rant incoherently in order to be considered a philosopher. John Milton said it best when he described philosophers arguing about what’s good and evil while burning in hell
> Of good and evil much they argued then.
Of happiness and final misery,
Passion and apathy, and glory and shame—
Vain wisdom all, and false philosophy!

Chad Milton. Philosophers are the worst.

>> No.16807549

>>16805671
Marx identifies the end-goal as Communism whereas most people since use the word to describe the ideological push (Marx would deny that it is ideological but it objectively is) FOR Communism, I.E. the project itself and whatever actually results from it, rather than the platonic ideal of the end result.

This is primarily because when actually expressed in an environment the ideal Communism did not occur, instead the push led to a bunch of other cataclysmic events and has since been trapped in an endless feedback loop of revisions and reassessments none of which anyone can pitch seriously anymore because there isn't enough distance between the last mass famine and the present.

>> No.16807645

>>16797685
>marx
>scientific
oh no no no this niggas retarded

>> No.16807646

>>16806199
Gotta give this fellow a well deserved (You)