/lit/ - Literature

The scientific explanation why Marx was wrong. He argued for a pseudo-science, i.e. a practice of the (pseudo) "scientific" method which he called historical materialism but which bore no empirical truth

The problematic with unfalsifiability of pseudoscience is that pseudoscience fundamentally remains just speculation without empirical confirmation and is thus scientifically useless. In this context, isn't all of philosophy useless?

No. What we need to make philosophy more scientific is to create a philosophical framework for psychoanalysis which really is just a recognition of Nietzsche's (and Hegel's!) efforts as scientific in practice, and not purely philosophical. In short, one needs to recognize the scientific Truth in Nietzsche's writings: that there is some form of objective Truth in the first place. Otherwise, Nietzsche's rules for life look like this:
>identify "the rules"
>break them

So how does the philosophical ubermensch Nietzsche approach objective good philosophically? He was basically a utilitarianist but also rejector of ethnic nationalism. But he was not necessarily against civic nationalism, and the echoes of (German) idealism remained in him despite his rejection of the German nationality.

So in this sense objective good can be defined as pseudo-objective, which can be defined using 2 assumptions:
>life is inherently different from non-life
>intelligent life is inherently different from non-intelligent life
>intelligent life is described as the capacity to carry abstract thought
and then from this we deduce that there is a form of (pseudo) objective good, which is a mixture of human own abstract thinking & existential crisis. but which does not apply to the rest of the animal world. also, the questions of sex & love & hope are fundamental for a modern critical theory

in short, Marx was wrong because he was life-denying in the Nietzschean sense. that's why he had barely any friends as a person. his ideology was a reaction to his friendlessness and solitude/loneliness, all of which coincided with poverty and thus was ripe grounds for own frustration. hence Marx's writings on the Jew and women. People want to associate themselves, ultimately, with a life-affirming ideology, not a life-denying one

>>18011911
>false desire to be righteous
you can only cope with waging through vice

Marx
>you’re not guaranteed to win
Yes i am

>The Proletariat are inevitably going to rebel against their capitalist overlords
Lmao this is the only that always gets me
"communism will win"
"communism is inevitable"
They have been saying this shit for over a century now and communism is 0.0% more popular.

>>17876687
Thoroughly debunked.

>>17847774
sex

>>17817374
My friend is one. His dad bought him a Dodge Charger last year

>>17252840
>t. bunkerchanoid basement dweller

>Dude capitalism will collapse any day now just trust me
And yet here we are 150 years later.

How many times must i remind them?

>>16643410
>>16643443
Stop replying to my threads and go clean your axe wound
>>16643441
Shove it up your ass.
Anyway now that i have your attention
Marxism was made by and for failures.

>>16422417
yeah I'm thinking based

>>16307634

>>16303231
He's still alive (and based)
Unlike that failure loser Marx who is burning in hell as we speak

>>16266650

>>16235496
Failures will naturally produce failure ideologies obviously.

Books about failures who worship an even bigger failure?

today i will remind them

>>16176706
Marxism. For failures by failures

Alternative marx sum up
>i wish i wasn't pathetic

>>15483124
I see a marx hate thread, i post the marx was a failure jpg. Its not hard work but its honest work.

>>15447825
based and redpilled

>>15409493
>>15409495
>>15409544
based