/lit/ - Literature

He was born too early to benefit from the theory of evolution. Without knowing the origin of man how can you know the deep truth of man?

>>13571128
yes
there is none

yes, monsieur, he is the ultimate philosopher of 19c german pessimism. otherwise he is just a german. and every german philosopher thinks they are the ultimate of the ultimate. that's why i prefer philosophers from Samoa. those coconuts really go hard but they know they at the end of the day, hahhahahahahahahaahahahah what were we talking about bro

>>13571136
He did well with what he had:
>"Yunghalm relates that he saw in Java a plain far as the eye could reach entirely covered with skeletons, and took it for a battlefield; they were, however, merely the skeletons of large turtles, five feet long and three feet broad, and the same height, which come this way out of the sea in order to lay their eggs, and are then attacked by wild dogs (Canis rutilans), who with their united strength lay them on their backs, strip off their lower armour, that is, the small shell of the stomach, and so devour them alive. But often then a tiger pounces upon the dogs. Now all this misery repeats itself thousands and thousands of times, year out, year in. For this, then, these turtles are born. For whose guilt must they suffer this torment? Where fore the whole scene of horror? To this the only answer is : it is thus that the will to live objectifies itself."
>Arthur Schopenhauer, The World as Will and Representation (Vol. 2: Supplements to the Second Book)

>>13571151
pretty impressive honestly

>>13571128
Schopenhauer is merely a feeble shadow of Shankara

>>13571167
Shankara is incomplete without Ramanuja. They're both dross, but they complete each other.

>>13571191
>>13571167
the same person literally

>>13571136
>He was born too early to benefit from the theory of evolution.
Darwin read Schopenhauer profusely and even cited The World as Will and Representation in The Descent of Man. His ideas were remarkably prescient, one could say that Schopenhauer really laid the fundamentals for the theory of evolution, the starting principles such as there being no grand, overarching telos to reality; that the Will is a blind, irrational process; that the preoccupation of man with his procreation is really the essence of his being and not some side product or distraction. He also believed humans weren't monogamous by nature.

Where to start with this man? I am no phil major, but am a decent bit familiar with some basic topics

>>13571128
I rank philosophers by facial hair. This guy is at the top. What, you expect me to actually read something before having an opinion about it?

>>13571207
Schopenhauer doesn't get the recognition he deserves.

>>13571207
huge if true

How can one man be this based

>>13571209
His major work, The World as Will and Representation. Or you could start by reading his short essays to get familiar with his writings.

You can read his essay on love right now:
https://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/s/schopenhauer/arthur/essays/chapter10.html


All you need to know is that there's something called Will, the Will is the thing that makes us do things and the cause of all suffering.

>>13571209
Compared to other German idealists of the time, Schopenhauer is extremely accessible because of his clear prose style (and humor). You can start with his main work The World as Will and Representation but it requires knowledge of Kant, since Kantian idealism is his starting point. But I wouldn't you say need to have READ Kant, just have good enough background info to get the basics.

In the Introduction Schopenhauer claims that all of WWR expresses one single thought, and that the book is not a pyramid constructed of argument upon argument, leading up to one grand conclusion. Rather, the single thought is everywhere and you would benefit a lot from multiple readings. Luckily, ol' Schop is a joy to read. You can basically open the book at random and start reading.

>>13571215
He was the most influential German philosopher up until 1914, but his legacy didn't really survive the chaos of the World Wars. He was intimately associated with Wagner, who in turn was completely vilified after WW2 because of his association with Hitler. Such a shame. I think there's a revival of appreciation happening though. Recently Houellebecq released an essay in praise of Schopenhauer, for example.

>>13571205
Big brain

>>13571224
>https://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/s/schopenhauer/arthur/essays/chapter10.html
>The third consideration is the skeleton, since it is the foundation of the type of the species. Next to old age and disease, nothing disgusts us so much as a deformed shape; even the most beautiful face cannot make amends for it — in fact, the ugliest face combined with a well-grown shape is infinitely preferable. Moreover, we are most keenly sensible of every malformation of the skeleton; as, for instance, a stunted, short-legged form, and the like, or a limping gait when it is not the result of some extraneous accident: while a conspicuously beautiful figure compensates for every defect. It delights us. Further, the great importance which is attached to small feet!
blackpilled as fuck

>>13571207
nice

>>13571191
I like Ramanuja but that's nonsense, Shankara is already complete. That's like saying Virgil completes Homer. Ramanuja largely just recycles Shankaras metaphysical scheme but with an added layer of devotionalism and multiplicity which is not only not found in but which is arguably mostly repudiated in the Upanishads, which is likely why Ramanuja never wrote commentaries on them so he wouldnt have to sidestep around and do a mental gymnastics over those verses like Madhva would later do.

>>13571295
What is blackpilled about that? You can shape your body but not your face so it's basically a great message that the former is so much outweighed by the latter. Or did I miss something there?

>>13571319
Nope.
It's a great thing to know that.

>>13571319
blackpill states that appearance is the most important aspect in love (both genders, but especailly in women who are way pickier). Looks, and especiallt the skeleton, is in general immutable. Which emphasizes the nihilism and depravity of the black pill. Furthermore, "short-legged form" is a dab on manlets, who are known to be significantly unattractive to women. There are other excerpts like

>small mouth, by means of small maxillae, is very essential, as it is the specific characteristic of the human face as distinguished from the muzzle of the brutes. A receding, as it were, a cut-away chin is particularly repellent, because mentum prominulum is a characteristic belonging exclusively to our species.

Literally talking about the chin and maxilla like a sophisticated incel on the internet. It's quite funny https://incels.wiki/w/Blackpill or just visit /r/braincels (inb4 hurr leddit)

>>13571136
>theory of evolution

not important to philosophy at all.

>>13571207
>Will is a blind, irrational proces

western philosophy is just existentialism, providing the grounds for atheism

>>13571615
What's wrong with atheism?

>>13571622
It makes some people upset that other people have found functional answers to life's questions that they can't agree with or control.
>inb4 fedora, cuck, you must be miserable/fun at parties, cumbrain and other assorted ephitets.

>>13571639
>>13571622
Atomism

>>13571191
>calling Shankara dross when Schoppy stated that the Upanishads were "the highest wisdom ever produced" despite only reading a shitty latin translation
If he had gotten the chance to read him Schoppy would have most likely ended up a bigger Shankara-fan than Guenon.

>>13571144
>pessimism

!

>>13571136
>theory of evolution

>>13571128
He says the brain produces the mind: wrong. No one can locate the mind nor can prove the brain produces the mind
He says the Will governs our passions, its the hormones actually

despite that hes pretty based and very close to the truth

>>13572262
The truth is becoming a tranny like you?

>>13571128
I consider myself a kind of dualistic variant of Schopenhauer. I agree with most of Schopenhauer ethical views regarding animal welfare, antinatalism, anti-progressivism, compassion, and much more, but I disagree with his monistic metaphysics though I sympathize with his later use of Platonic Forms. I think the dualism of Mani and Empedocles were closer to the Truth. There are fundamentally two mutually antagonistic Wills of Love/order/good and Strife/chaos/evil.
Schopenhauer respected the cosmological dualist viewpoint of Zoroastrianism moreso than Abrahamic monotheism as expressed in the "On the Suffering of this World". Granted, I think if Cologne Mani Codex were uncovered and translated during Schopenhauer's time, he would have also found a kindred spirit in Mani, though he may have still claimed the Upanishads spoke more to himself.
Also, visual representation is a better way to understand the fundamental dual nature of Will, not music. This is because it is easier to see the fundamental distinctiveness of the separate yet conflicting Wills through vision.

>>13571144
>that's why i prefer philosophers from Samoa

cringe

>>13571222
absolute unitoid

>>13571207

so a load of horseshit, thanks

>>13571396
>Furthermore, "short-legged form" is a dab on manlets, who are known to be significantly unattractive to women

>>13571396
>A receding, as it were, a cut-away chin is particularly repellent, because mentum prominulum is a characteristic belonging exclusively to our species.
>tfw not receding nor protuding chin bur rather "neutral" one

>>13571396
>appearance is the most important aspect in love
read the entire book retard
this section is depicting what WOMEN need to be like to be attractive
the next section is about male attractiveness

>>13571128
I consider myself a kind of dualistic variant of Schopenhauer. I agree with most of Schopenhauer ethical views regarding animal welfare, antinatalism, anti-progressivism, ascetism, compassion, and much more, but I disagree with his monistic metaphysics though I sympathize with his later use of Platonic Forms. I think the dualism of Mani and Empedocles were closer to the Truth. There are fundamentally two mutually antagonistic Wills of Love/order/good and Strife/chaos/evil.
Schopenhauer respected the cosmological dualist viewpoint of Zoroastrianism moreso than Abrahamic monotheism as expressed in the "On the Suffering of this World". Granted, I think if Cologne Mani Codex were uncovered and translated during Schopenhauer's time, he would have also found a kindred spirit in Mani, though he may have still claimed the Upanishads spoke more to himself.
Also, visual representation is a better way to understand the fundamental dual nature of Will, not music. This is because it is easier to see the fundamental distinctiveness of the separate yet conflicting Wills through vision.

>>13571396
>both genders, but especially in women who are way pickier
You didn't even read it, he specifically states the selection for physical attributes occurs when the males select for females, NOT the other way around.

>>13571128
Arguably Schopenhauer and Nietzsche are the first sophists setting the stage for the French "philosophers" like Camus and Foucault.

Can Schopenhauer's claims be backed by science?

>>13571142
cringe

>throwing out kant's whole critical framework for his unfounded subjective idealist fanfic
truly the height of philosophy

>>13572657
the sophists were the first sophists you retard

>>13571157
there's more. look it up

>>13571242
>Recently Houellebecq released an essay in praise of Schopenhauer, for example.
Wow had no idea about this. Know where I can find an English translation?

>>13571151
Well fuck I am impressed. Holy shit he beat darwin to it.

I feel like he’s a great descriptive philosopher, maybe the best, but his prescriptive stuff feels half-baked.

>>13571167
Hi Netherlands

>>13572713

He also wrote a little booklet on Lovecraft.

>>13571128
>Is this the ultimate philosopher?
"no"

>>13573547
that's a distinction people should be more clear about in their critiques

>>13573586
Yeah I know about that one. Also that cover looks like utter shit