/lit/ - Literature

Kierkegaard

Neo-platonism

>>11854267
What was he right about?

>>11854265
Kant.

>>11854271
Post neo-Platonisc jazz NOW
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PxwB0_8-1us

>>11854278
HALLELEUJAH
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jPTN39VbyV4

>>11854283
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CYDyTcxfAU0

REEEEEEEE

Havel

me

>>11854271
>>11854278
>>11854283
>>11854287
based and redpilled

>>11854403
She's so autistic. I want to nakadashi her

>>11854403
hey Joe

>>11854275
but Op said to cut the bullshit

>>11854503
who

>>11854564
Where you gonna go

>>11854576
WHOSE JOE

>>11854265
No one. They're all hacks.

>>11854384
Wrong
>>11854265
Me.

>>11854590
WHOSE GLAD I DIDN'T SAY JONANA

>>11854861
>>11854265
This. Philosophy is only impressive at the beginning and/or if you're a doctrinarian, as many people on /lit/ actually are. The more you read, the more you start to realize that at least 90% of them are totally disingenuous and just writing crap to support whatever they want to believe. Even those that seem supremely rational like Kant still have an agenda.
Having said this, modern philosophy is definitely worse than ancient and medieval philosophy. I have no doubt there are people on this board that legitimately think Nietzsche is a genius and that probably haven't and won't read a person like Anselm ever in their fucking life.

>>11854403
she is cute, CUTE!
And she's on the TRUE PATH.

Philosophy DOES NOT SAVE.

>>11854271
>t. STEMfag

>>11854272
"We live our way into thinking; we do not think our way into living" -Kierkegaard

Kierkegaard was right in being the best phenomenalogist. However, his philosophy was not "right" as much as it was his own and true for him as your philosophy should be true for you and do the same.

Other good branches/thinkers:
William James, John Dewey, and Pragmatism although both James and Dewey have things wrong that I disagree with.
Jean-Paul Sartre is a good read if you want to get laid via existentialism.
Platonists should be shot, these as well as many philiosophical branches are more about society, and this is where I think Dewey has his faults as well, instead of the individual. These people have a general disdain for the phenomena of the individual and see philosophy as something meant to better society, a reverse of this is true. Bettering the individual betters society, idealistic society worship betters no one as we have seen occur since the 1960s.

All of them

>>11854265
They are all right when they're tearing down the other guy, but none are right when establishing their own foundation.

Daniel Dennett

>>11855517
>"platonists should be shot"
I'm a Platonist, fight me. Why do you hate the truth?

>>11855541
You idealistic fool. There is no truth except for the one we create ourselves.

>>11856097
Sounds like a truth

>>11854265

>>11854265
slavoj zizek, very intelligent reading of hegel and lancan, pratical for modern times and (thank god) still alive today.

None of them because western philosophy doesn't bother itself with primordial truth

not even a eastern loving faggot before anyone feels like insulting me, just someone who has read extensively

Aristotle, Pierce and Stirner.

Neechee was so right he reshaped the entire West.

>>11855517
In response to your point about individualism, how do you respond IRL to people who preach about bettering society while ignoring the individual?

All of them, even the hacks.

>>11854590
With that gun in your hand