/lit/ - Literature

>>10925542
Ayn Rand. Anyone who considers her discourse valuable to any society should be shot.

Noam Chomsky, probably.

>>10925542
Ayn Rand
Sam Harris
Sartre

>>10925591
I am not indebted enough to defend Sarte and I do think Ayn Rand and Sam Harris are both shitters so we might be of similar mind; do you mind extrapolating a little bit about your (or 'the') disdain for Sarte though?
I've always had a bit of a fondness for him but haven't gotten deeper into his work than a highschool presentation on him for a debate class and some browsing of his wikiquote page.

>>10925627
I don't have a particular disdain for Sartre personally, but from what I've gathered from my friends and the internet he's one of the most hated people in academia

>>10925542
>Le bait image XD

>>10925591
>sam harris
>philosopher
it takes more than a podcast and a pop science book

Plato

Does Camus count as a philosopher ?

Ayn Rand
Jordan Peterson
Sam Hyde

>>10925551
Yep, cod-philosophical hack.

As far as serious philosophers go, shit cycles in and out of fashion all the time. When i was in academia Althusser was on the bottom rung of the cycle but that was a while back and for all I know things may be swinging his way once again.

>>10925634
How is it bait you soyboy? Nobody likes Singer.

>>10925627
All he did was boil down Heideggers theory and present it incorrectly. He was the Alan Watts of existenialism.

>>10925542
The worst philosophers aren't thought of. They're forgotten.

>>10925644

>>10925591
>>10925632
Pleb. Don't lump a serious philosopher with those hacks, especially when you haven't read him.

>>10925736
*tips*

>>10925721
Singer does a better job of demonstrating the hypocrisy of most moral systems than any other philosopher. The moral system he ultimately constructs in place of everything else is still ridiculous, and his failure to apprehend this is a severe fault against him, but he has had a more positive impact on the world and has made more progress in ethics than his critics are going to admit.

As long as we're discounting the twentieth century hack "philosophers" then I'd probably say Nietszche. Couldn't make heads or tails of what was good about him, all his arguments seemed pretty weak. Granted I haven't read some of the more esoteric guys like husserl. Also Kropotkin seemed pretty full of shit, if he counts

>>10925736
Then why do I keep seeing people talk about Hegel

>>10925721

wtf you talking about. he's very respected. sure he's sais some whacky things but he argues for his position. he doesn't pull stuff out of his ass

>>10925542
I always think that this questions is stupid because the names that everyone knows are all of good philosophers. Bad philosophers remain unknown because their work sucks.

>>10928251
t. retard

>>10925632
I think hate towards Sartre stems from his defense of 'Negritude' and the colonised in general. Heavy decolonial, marxist vibes stigmatised him back then and we see the effects now

>>10930012
also all the rape

>>10925644
he literally studied philosophy

not sure what the fuck did he read in his degree though, he seems to ignore all moral philosophy before himself or any philosopher for that matter that aren't current mind philosophy anglo memes

>>10925542
Analyticz HATE Derrida so there's that. But fuck Anglo feels anyway

Hegel aka retarded Aristotle

>>10925712
You weren't supposed to post the best ones.

>>10930043
do they? Derrida is barely relevant anymore, only Searle sperged out at Derrida at some point, and all the meme degrees nowadays follow either Foucault or some illiterate american meme academic like Bell Hooks

>>10925721
STOP EATING MEAT

>>10928441
I can see his junk.

>>10930126
i tried but i found myself in an all you can eat korean bbq and i couldn't stop myself. that was when i knew singer's philosophy was garbage

>>10925561
Not a philosopher

>>10925708
Only if dostoyevsky counts

Karl Jaspers

>>10930592

No, Camus counts, Dostojewski doesn't (Even though the books are essential for proper western discourse)

>>10930632

Also how the fuck did nobody name Frankfurt yet?

What about clearly overhyped Žižek? All he seems to do is boil down bigger philosophical theories for normies

Over 1k publications or something and most of his theoreis are stolen like the second order volition system from the stoics and heidgger

>>10930012
i wrote somewhere that he also recommended to just keep quit about the atrocities that happened under communist leaderships. that is very NOT philosophical

>>10928441
where this nigga legs

>>10930639
Zizek point is KIND OF true, except that if you ignore all his (fairly deliberate) memeing and dumbing-down, and take a look at Sublime Object of Ideology (his breakthrough work) and Less Than Nothing (his 800 page book on Hegel), you'll discover that he's got some pretty serious foundation to back up all the bullshitting.

As for the Frankfurt School, there's nothing bullshit about Adorno (and his groupie Horkheimer) or Walter Benjamin, although Marcuse needs to be fucked off out of the discourse.

>>10930830

yeah zizek doesn't say bad stuff, but for people who really bother with philosophy they can just mostly read the original stuff (i.e hegel instead of less than nothing)

and I mean harry frankfurt, i'm fine with the frankfurt school even though I would add it more to social science than philosophy

>>10930845
Benjamin and Adorno at least shoulf be classified into philosophy

>>10928441
Oh daddy

>>10928245
Cause he inspired a whole new school of thought frankly, even though his transcendental philosophy is bunk

>>10925542
Betrand Russell

>>10925542
Derrida, Foucault, Marx, Lyotard, Marcuse, and tbqh, Keynes.

Basically anyone who subtly or not, hates Jews and would subvert capitalism amidst a jealous and ignorant ressentiment.

>>10925712
Ayn may have been crazy, and anarcho-capitalism is not a workable answer, but she wasn't entirely wrong, we are too prone to authoritarianism and capitalism is the single grandest achievement of mankind.

You'd have to honestly be a bit retarded not to notice Jordan Peterson is seriously good. His capacity to encourage open-minded tolerance and a respect for oneself as well as one's influence, is truly unparalleled.

I would seriously recommend his Maps of Meaning lecture series, that shit is life changing in the most positive manner.

>>10931639
Of course a peep's knowledge of philosophy is such that they think Jordan Peterson and Ayn Rand are serious thinkers.

As someone who has bothered to read to read Maps of Meaning I can tell you it's a perfectly acceptable minor text. Emphasis on minor. "People don't get the fact/value distinction right need more story facts. Myth Myth Myth. My scientific-rational position is value neutral" + adequate psychology stuff.

There are a variety of ways that people can come to insights and so reading dumb stuff isn't always a waste of time for brainlets. But defending bad work on the grounds that it lead you to something is retarded. Wisdom is beyond you as a peep, but prudence is not.

Also anyone who says Sartre is bad hasn't read any of his major work. Critique of Dialectical Reason is excellent.

Daily reminder that Mini is not a food and was thus put here to consume the other teams. Down with the mint heresy.

>>10925708
I got dinged on a paper for calling him a philosopher, so no.

>>10925542
Decartes

>>10931877
that professor is an enormous faggot

>>10928441
this makes me feel fuzzy inside

>>10928251
>>10928194
Singer is a subhuman retard

>>10931988
Lol, by who?

>>10932452
this.

me

Ayn Rand
Jordan Peterson
Sam Harris

can someone red pill me on Paul de Man? I'm really into transcendentalism and feminine tactility in writing. Is Aesthetic Ideology worth reading or the Rhetoric of Romanticism. thanks!

>>10931765
I love reading science/history denialists trying to save face, it's always the same story, spew desperate ad hominem and hope something sticks.

Enjoy your resentful little community of blog posting ignorants mate, the rest of society will be over here, doing science, learning from history, and making the world a better place.

Kant basically killed Aristotelianism and initiated the decline of Western philosophy. The influence of Eastern philosophy in the early 19th century was the last nail in the coffin, so Schopenhauer is the second worst.

>>10925708
yes you dumb shit

>>10931593
this

>>10934907
Aristotelianism deserved to be killed.

>>10931593
>Basically anyone who subtly or not, hates Jews and would subvert capitalism amidst a jealous and ignorant ressentiment.

>>10934907
>killed Aristotelianism
Pleb! — Scholasticism was under attack since at least Descartes and Hobbes. British Empiricism was a giant circlejerk over Aristotle's dead corpus. Kant showed up late and just twisted the knife.

As to Opie's question, I answer John Locke. He spent Book I of his Essay dismissing "innate ideas," but his argument rested on the thesis that the human mind (and its thoughts) are completely transparent to the Self. Leibniz, like a gentleman, tried to stop Locke from publishing this argument, as Leibniz was arguing for a subconscious faculty.

Then he left the door open for phenomenalists like Berkeley and Hume to destroy, utterly, any notion of substance. Locke was a pussy philosopher who left crucial gaps in his arguments and tried to kick sand over them, like a cat does his shit in a litter-box. He never even gave an argument against direct (or naïve) realism! He just assumed it was incorrect!

In summation, Locke was a chickenshit, weak-ass philosopher whose aim far outstretched his ability. Look at him! Even the weakest anon could totally take him in a fight.

>>10925712

HE CAN'T KEEP GETTING AWAY WITH IT