/lit/ - Literature

Once an economic collapse happens and people realize they want more aesthetics in life and that they must cease bifurcating nature, ecology will become the foremost and purest science replacing physics and Marx along with Whitehead will be taken up as our patron thinkers. This will all be taken up by the based Chinaman as they become the next hegemon bringing down the cringe Anglo Americans.

Guenonian

Landian

>>13432148
Jordan B. Petersonian :)
Or even better Stefan Molyneuxian!

>>13432176
>Marxist ecology
lel I sincerely fucking doubt it. Chinks are too busy snorting rhino horn in place of Viagra. Do you even know anything about ecology or did you just read some political meme books?

Blavatskyian

>>13432180
tpbp

>>13432196
It's just a dream I think that we are actually fucked becase people are too stupid :(

>>13432177
literally who?

>>13432297
newfag

>>13432196
rhinos going extinct sucks but let's not pretend they are ecologically important in 2019

real ecological issues are the decay of the ocean, climate, bees, acidification, etc.

>>13432303
no I mean he is a literal who lol

>>13432176
More likely we will have authoritarian engorcement of equity and hopfully some fucking eugenics before thr human population destroys the world. Freedom and privacy will both die.

>>13432314
I think his implication was of the insouciant attitude that the chinese bugmen take toward killing rhinos or running each other over lending to them not embracing ecological protection.

me-an desu

Kafkaesque

>>13432148
>21st century will be some-guy-who-we-do-not-know-the-name-of-yetian

>>13432211
That'd be fucking hilarious desu.
And with self help shit gradually becoming the prevailing ideology of the only superpower, we're fucking getting there.

wallaceian

>>13432177
this
>>13432297
>>13432444
butthurt Deluzefag always reveals himself

>20th century was Deleuzian

Retard

>>13432148
The century of Anon Anonberg

>>13432148
Landian

>>13432545
No, it won't be you-an, it will be me-an :D
also OP is wrong about spinozian, marxian, and deleuzian

>>13432148
Wildbergian

>>13432148
>20th century was Deleuzian

?

How about Heideggerian?

>>13432180
This except an R instead of L

>>13432148
Disneyan

>>13432176
Nah it'll be the based African BLACK BVLL

>>13432148
Harrisian ;) suk my fuckign dick you anti-materialist scum together with your Sankara and Guenon, 21st century will the CENTURY when the world finally realizes that rationalism is the only viable way for humanity and that empiricism is the only viable philosophy for that humanity. We shall burn your books like you burned ours. We shall burn you heretics on our stake and we shall usher on your bloody corpses a new secular society that will last a thousand years...

Would a basedboy say.
I'd say Zizekian is probably the best for the first half of the century. I'm not sure about the other half.

>>13432843
how did it get from basedboy to basedboy? An actual what the fuck?

>>13432148
4chanian

>>13432148
Bach
Hegel
Joyce
Chaplin
Zyzz


Fixed*

>>13432148
Mydiaryian desu

>>13432148
>marxian
Hegelian anon
20th is probably hrideggerian but maybe split with Witt

Also kant was 1780-1850 then hegel 1850-1900 or 15
Id say 18th was more hume and 16th more descartes

>>13433186
>>13432753
Adorno tore up Heidegger and all the existentialists.

>>13433186
and Quinean (in the post-1960 analytic tradition at least)

>>13432148
17th century was most likely Cartesian (though sure there are many other philosophers at that time that were pretty influential like Bacon, Voltaire, Spinoza, Pascal, Locke, Hobbes, Berkeley and Leibniz

>>13432148
Me. It will be me-ian

Baudrillardian

>>13432148
Petersian

we had this exact same thread with the exact same post sequence literally a couple months ago. I am certian of it.

>>13432148
Well it's definitely true that the most important fields in contemporary philosophy are things like ethics and philosophy of the mind, especially because of their relationship with artificial intelligence, and while there are many figures in philosophy of the mind, the most prominent of them is probably Chalmers followed by Dennett, Sellars, and Searle, and for ethics it's probably Moore, Mackie, Rawls, Habermas and Anscombe,and sure there are things like contemporary metaphysics where David Lewis and Hilary Putnam are pretty important, and in the philosophy of language as with Kripke but these subjects aren't as important contemporarily as are ethics and the philosophy of mind. Therefore my opinion is that the 21st century is Chalmersian, Chalmers is the descartes of the first half of the 21st century (by bringing into prominence the hard problem of consciousness) and you could say perhaps Moorian or Anscombian insofar as ethics goes

>>13432148
Also I forgot to include Derek Parfit and Peter Singer in ethics, but in my opinion they are mostly popular. Though I'll just say I'm a utilitarian like Peter Singer :)

>>13433292
I mean I like Russell Peters too, but I don't think he has that kind of staying power.

>>13433345
also in continental philosophy it's Habermas and Badiou

>>13432148
if you were a Spinozan in the 17th century you would have likely been burned at the stake. Your whole paradigm is off. 21 century is Deleuzian btw, we're just getting started.

>>13432148
Roganesque

>>13433345
>I'm a utilitarian like Peter Singer
dear fucking lord, please reconsider

>>13433374
based and thispilled

>>13432148
Realistically it’ll be a Zizek and Dugin scenario.
>not following and ideology is still an ideology
>multipolar world ruling
>ethnos places as high importance to a societies well being
>post-modernists burnt at the stake
>rise of quantum-christianity, based upon ontological incompleteness

>>13433381
Well I'm not exactly a utilitarian, I'm more a sentientist as I call myself, because intrinsic value is ultimately related to sense-perception and the rest are just transcendental illuions, but of course from this it doesn't follow that one can make an algebra out of sentience as with utilitarianism, and in addition it's clear that every consciousness is exclusive of other consciousness, so you can't just add happiness and sadness from different people. Moreover, it's a bit subjective to consider certain sensations more valuable than others, though it seems to make sense that pleasure is a good thing, but it's not something that can be analysed further. Therefore, that's why it's best to have something minimal like "sentientism" where at least the quality of sentience matters, and everything else is built upon the ways one thinks of sentience (one possibility hence, is utilitarianism)

>>13432148
lol

>>13432148
sneed

>>13432148
>Descartes
>Kant
>Hegel
>Marx or Nietzsche

ftfy OP

>>13432492
I will never cease to be amazed at the capacity of the chinaman to kill the chinaman
There are just so fucking many examples of them destroying life, sometimes out of negligence, sometimes out of malice, sometimes out of seeming boredom
Why? It's sincerely baffling

>>13432148
retarded.

>>13433526
Based and absolutely accurate, OP is a pseud.

>>13432148
>19th not Nietszchean
>20th not Sartrian, Deleuzian, and Fukayamist/ Buchananist

To say the 20th was ideologically or philosophically monopolar is just a bad take

Mostly Heideggerian/Stiegglerian and a bit of Zizekian

>>13433789
*Stieglerian

...fantastic!

>>13432148
Lynchian

Trumpian

>>13433813
absolutely based post

>>13432148
Durian

>>13432148
>>20th century was Deleuzian
there was this guy called Freud, you know... said pretty important thungs, you know...

>>13432148
A cluster fuck. We have too much connectivity and paradoxical variation to have a zeitgeist even somewhat definable by the views of a singular author.

With our luck it'll be Zizek

>>13432148
>17th century was Spinozan
no
>18th century was Kantian
no
>19th century was Marxian
no
>20th century was Deleuzian
no

you're welcome

>>13432148
The 20th century was Derridean

>>13433323
The one person here who seems to have an inkling of an idea what they're talking about and lo and behold you get no responses, because everyone else in this thread is a posturing fucking pseud. Fuck this board.

>>13432148
It has to be Olavian. Unfortunately he isn't read except by a few enlightened members of the COF.

>>13432148
Freudian

>>13432148
Ligottian

Felixian

>>13434875
he's literally ignoring half of all philosophy and pretending the other half is the only thing that exists

>>13432148
Since we've had nothing but shitty pop-philosophers and positivist morons larping as scientists I'd say the 21st century will be Wattsian and Saganian

>>13435502
Stephen Hawking was right - philosophy is dead.

>>13432148
Trumpian

>>13433772
>fukuyama
>ever being taken as a serious intellectual
DUDE THE SOVIET UNION IS LIKE THE END BOSS OF HISTORY, WE BEAT THE GAME

>>13432148
John Green-ian

>>13432211
Is that her? Didn't realize she was so pretty.

It will be mine when I release my manifesto and finally solve philosophy for good. Look forward to it, nerds.

>>13435859
That's Alexandra David-Néel. Blavatsky was an uggo.

>>13432691
>Wildbergian
based and rational pilled

>>13435981
>Alexandra David-Néel.
i dislike so much the normie infatuation with her

>>13433323
>Chalmers followed by Dennett, Sellars, and Searle
>Big Boys of English Speaking academia
>Singer
The philosophical equivalent of Judge Judy, Singer's self-contradictory pap ("abortion and infanticide are acceptable because these immature humans are incapable or rational preference" vs. "rationality is not a requirement for ethical conduct. Any irrational being will avoid pain, which is why cruelty to animals is unethical", which are flatly contradictory positions). Makes money by writing books that tell Liberals 'doing what you want is A-OK"
A buffoon.
>Chomsky
A decent linguist, his work in every other field is no more (or less) than self-serving rent seeking which he publicly admits that he, himself, does not believe.
Darn good at making a buck of gullible college students, but (unless you are speaking of linguistics, where he is very good) not a big academic.
>Dawkins
A mediocre-at-best scientist who will leave exactly zero mark on actual science, he became popular as a writer of PopSci books. When that income source dried up (because his theories were soundly thrashed by scientists) he switched to a series of popular books trashing what he thinks religious people might believe.
Never was a great thinker, never will be.
>Rorty
A man who counted on his readers having never heard of Gorgias, Rorty took facile rhetoric, relabeled it neopragmatism, and sold it like snake oil.
>Chalmers
About time an actual academic appeared. although, to be fair, while he does a fine job of reminding everyone of the hard problem, he has no answers. Which is no one's fault.
>Dennett
Refuses to use proper terms, mainly to hide that, deep down, he he knows any clear statement of his theories leads to eye-rolling
Not a serious academic.
.
This list is a list of "People that stupid people think are smart"

>>13432148
Kanye West

>>13432148
This is so retarded, the 20th century should be Freudian and the 21st century should be Deleuzian. Regardless of whether his ideas were pseudoscience or not, his analysis of society and the vector of modern life in books like Civilisation and its Discontents and Beyond the Pleasure Principle really are integral to understanding the trajectory of modernity. Freud is also essential if you want to call an entire century "Deleuzian", its almost impossible to engage with his ideas without passing through (and ultimately rejecting) Freud.

Cartesian

>>13432492
It doesn't matter what Chinese bugmen thinks. It's ecological after all. The only group matter is the one with power. AKA the oligarchy. If the Chinese bugmen refuse to adapt to ecological thinking, then oligarchy will have no qualms using their power to ensure their existence by protecting the ecology over mere plebians.

>>13435988
Cringest post I've seen a while

For the 21st century:
1- Wilfrid Sellars
2- Xavier Zubiri
3- Comte

>>13432148
>>13436786
I would say the 20th century was Ellulian (?). He called it best.

Wallacian

>>13432180
This

>>13433283
this

>>13433813

Nick Land

>>13435135
>Felixian
not Kjellbergian

>>13432148
Landian

>>13433412
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QdgrR5fQd1o

>>13432148
Zuckerbergian

>>13432148

Yudkowskian

>>13432176
>Once an economic collapse happens
Unfortunately this will never happen

>>13440103
the law of value implies otherwise brother - hh

>>13440134
yeah and Jesus will return very soon

>>13440158
but that's not a scientific theory with robust empirical confirmation

>>13440185
i fucking love science bro

>>13432148
Just wait a few years, im writting it

Reichwaldian

>>13432176
>aesthetics in life
>ecology
>chink hegemony
pick fucking one

>>13432148
Ahrimanic

>>13441338
why cant you have aesthetics and ecology?

>>13433392
>>not following and ideology is still an ideology
it's not, it's not the 90s anymore, we are post-post-ideological now and Zizek is clueless. i'd say it will be more Land and Dugin

>>13441376
Because it's fundamentally materialistic and scientistic, caging life within definitions and laws

>>13441512
No it isn't. Read Whitehead

>>13432148
Tbh it’s too early to tell

>Last century there were 5 good philosophers by this time
>We are stuck with pop scientists and pseudointellectial rhetoriticians
I hate this

>>13433813
Perfect.

>>13442766
Yes it is. Read Heidegger

>>13432148
Kardashian

21st century will be Judith Butlerian

>>13432148
Spenglerian
Not even meming

>>13433234
>Adorno liked to imagine he tore up Heidegger while Heidegger was far more influential than humpty dumpty ever will be
ftfy