/lit/ - Literature

I pick Voltaire, we share a few bottles of wine, make fun of the other eight faggots and fuck off to Switzerland afterwards.

Plato was a wrestler so I pick him, I bet he'd fuck those other niggers up. Kant was like 5'1" or some shit and half of these faggots were malnourished, Plato could throw them around like rag dolls. Marx seems like he might be deceptively burly so I would advise Plato to save him for last and try to position himself on the opposite side of the mob so that Marx does much of Plato's work for him and is tired out by the end. Then when they square off against eachother and they're the only two left, pick up the shortest corpse nearby (ideally Kant's or Nietzsche's) and beat Marx to death with it

>>15690978
Platon

>>15690978
Hegel because he has read almost all of the others (and will tell that Marx is a hack quickly) and also because he's not an introverted faggot who will stutter at the attempt of debating (looking at you, Nietzsche)

>>15691039
>Kant was like 5'1" or some shit and half of these faggots were malnourished

>>15690978
I'd go with Machiavelli because while the others are all arguing and shouting over each other, us two would be sat in a corner plotting how to get away with all their missus and like £20,000 in cash.

>>15690978
marx because he has read all of the others except nietzsche who is easy to deal with

>>15691022
This is the right answer

>>15691039
This is right as well

>>15690978
I'm a Marxist, but in all honesty, in any serious debate, Hegel would mog everyone in your pic, including himself.

>>15691816
>I'm a Marxist
I'm sorry about your low IQ (or possible brain damage), anon. I'm sure you'll cope in life somehow. Don't give up hope!

>>15691865
Why is /lit/ so easy to bait nowadays?

>>15691919
>I was just pretending to be retarded!

>>15691940
this but unironically

Hobbes, Plato, and Aristotle could beat everyone else in that picture to death fairly easily. I think plato kills everyone, with hobbes being the second strongest combatant

>>15691816
Marx is the only one worth having on your side besides Nietzsche, because they were both born in the 19th-century and incredibly well read. Marx and Nietzsche also have the talent of roasting and ridiculing people when debates get carried on a rhetorical level.

Plato would be as useful as a pothead, Aristotle would be sober but completely out of touch with what has been happening after 2000 years of human history.
Machiavelli would be like "dude this shit is actually like this Florentine poem lmao", Hobbes would get autistic about "muh government , Voltaire about "muh royality and freeze peach".

Marx and Nietzsche are the only sane choices because they are only ones up to the task of BTFOing Kant and Hegel. These last two are the real threat.

>>15691022
I would also pick Boltaire, but for an entirely different reason. Because he is a powerfull rhetorician it wouldnt matter even if the opposition is right. We would slander him to death with sophestry.

>>15691039
>>15692001
Did you read the post? It’s a debate, not a fight to the death.

>>15690978
Where the fuck is Diogenes? He would fuck up every o e of these clowns.

>>15692028
war is politics by other means faggot

>>15691816
Marx is the only one worth having on your side besides Nietzsche, because they were both born in the 19th-century and incredibly well read. Marx and Nietzsche also have the talent of roasting and ridiculing people when debates get carried on a rhetorical level.

Plato would be as useful as a pothead, Aristotle would be sober but completely out of touch with what has been happening after 2000 years of human history.
Machiavelli would be like "dude this shit is actually like this Florentine poem lmao", Hobbes would get autistic about "muh government , Voltaire about "muh royality and freeze peach".

Marx and Nietzsche are the only sane choices because they are only ones up to the task of BTFOing Kant and Hegel. These last two are the real threat, but eventually, nobody would understand Hegel at some point, and Kant would be mocked for his ethics.

Then, the grande finale, Marx vs. Nietzsche, would be quite something.

>>15692014
I think kant and hegel will actually be better since they are more experienced and more talented at rheoretical arguments. Marx is known for doing away with a lot of the theoretical for material acfion, and neitzche is more a poet and great portrayer of ideas rather than comprehensive and rigorous. Kant and Hegel would deconstruct from the very smallest aspect of logic and reasoning.

>>15692058
>>15692044

>>15692044
Rigorous debates between left and right wing Hegelians tend to be the most spectacular, I find, and if done right are actually productive, so I'd say Hegel/Marx for finale, Neetzche wouldn't last long I'm afraid.

>>15692001
Hobbes was notoriously timorous though. It's claimed his timidity was one of the reasons that, in Leviathan, he recommended that "men of feminine courage" should be exempted from having to fight for their sovereign.

>>15692080
It does of course depend on which Nietzsche we are given, for some would be quite spectacularly useful in their attacks but for much of Nietzsche's life he was really quite incapable, it seems, of properly interacting with other people.

>>15692106
>he recommended that "men of feminine courage" should be exempted from having to fight for their sovereign.
Based. I just want to play lute for God's sake.

>>15692080
Add kant and i agree.

>>15692106
He's still a large man, he could snap kantgoblin, NEETzsche, and marx like twigs

>>15690978
>pseud
>autist
>midwit
>manchild
>schizo
>stemlord
>bitterfuck
>based
>not even a philosopher
It's not that hard but I wouldn't debate the other 8 subhumans anyway

>>15690978
>Choose Plato
>Immediately rush and murder Aristotle
>Hegel, despite being on the other side, tackles Marx out of his chair and begins strangling him to death
>Machiavelli stays in his chair and begins writing a satire about how the pope is a bastard
>Marx feebly struggles but manages to starve another two of his children to death before suffocating to death
>Voltaire turns to Kant to ask him who Marx is
>Kant shoots Voltaire without looking up from his unbuttered toast
>Nietzche is a syphilitic retard and rocks back and forth saying nothing
>Hobbe looks at all of this and says "See this is why we need government."
>Gentile peeks into the room, looks around, and then slowly backs out with a "mama-mia" of dismay

>>15692205
>Schopenhaur watches all of this from outside of the room, vigorously masturbating and muttering under his breath about "roasties"

>>15692106
>It's claimed
Sounds more like a retarded gorssip

Marx

>>15692231
>socrates sees what happens and tells everyone how he debated them so ebigly they all killed themselves.
>One of his students creates the original smug ideological MS paint comic

>>15692231
>Diogenes crashes the party and starts yelling at everyone and then drags off the closest philosopher to be reeducated.

>>15690978
>OP asks about debate
>thread immediately derails into which philosopher could physically assault the next
Actually based

>>15692231
>Stirner, watching over the CCTV system, opens his mouth to comment at the exact moment Descartes tightens the garrote around his throat

>>15692039
>>15692297
Hes literally only brought up for his witticisms, not any of his actual thought. Fully normie teir.

>>15692414
All of these philosophers are normie tier lol.

>>15693445
Yes, I forgot how the local rick and morty tee shirt wearing 9th grader hit me with some Ontotheology.... Ow wait, no He said how diogenies said a man was a plucked bird. Sorry, the two are easy to confuse.

>>15692185
Why is Plato based?

>>15690978
Nietzsche is the most likely to say "Nah mate I don't feel like it" and is also a Spinozist, so I'd go for him. Marx is my second option and Voltaire my third

>>15693480
>muh anecdotal experience
Kys.

>>15693514
Why do you say that? I really got to say either Kant or hegel. Both were phil professors and would probably regularly engage in debates, as well as specificly focusing on highly systemic conceptual topics.

>>15690978
a lot of interesting options, but h*gel would make the opponents commit suicide

>>15693540
Its not even anecdotal. Tell me when was the last time a "normie" brought up Kant or Hobbes. Diogenes is remembered literally for his witticisms, being a meme on reddit, and like one youtube video by Sam O'nella.

>>15693570
You literally shared an anecdote. Besides,
they're all memes bro. You gotta define normie cause most normies cannot even name a single philosopher except the Greek three. If you want anecdotes, I hear pseuds namedrop Kant, Descarte, and Hegel alot.

>>15690978
Plato if it’s was 8 on 2, Machiavelli if we had time to plan our atTacK

>>15693602
The example i gave is anecdotal, but qualitatively its rather evident that there is a wide gap between those in OP's pic and diogenes in terms of import and skill. It was a hypothetically believable example to illustrate my point. anyways, pseud is different from normie. Psueds talk about high brow stuff without knowing shit about it. Normies dont even pretend that. There are literal Hegel and Kant scholars, I dont think there is anyone literally dedicated to Diogenes, since he was just an interesting guy from the cynic school of thought.

>>15690978
Where the fuck is Hume? That's who I would have picked. In any case...

>Marx
Brilliant guy, but not prepped for general philosophical combat at this level. Pass.

>Aristotle
DEFINITELY want this guy on my team. If he's given a chance to brush up on the developments over the subsequent 2000 years, he is unbeatable. Top of the short list.

>Machiavelli
Too narrowly focused on political philosophy. Pass.

>Nietzsche
A great poet and philologist, but not a philosopher. Pass.

>Hegel
Absolutely worthless. Pass.

>Hobbes
Brilliant guy, but only his political philosophy is still relevant. Pass.

>Kant
One of the top 5 greatest philosophers of all time. Still, too long-winded to be of help in my corner when push comes to shove. Short list.

>Plato
No doubt a great genius, and quick on his feet. Still, would need about 10 times as long a time than Aristotle to get up to speed on the latest scientific and philosophical developments. Short list.

>Voltaire
A delightful satirist and social commentator. Not a philosopher. Pass.

>Missing as options:
Thomas Aquinas
Augustine
Epicurus
Democritus
David Hume
Gottfried Leibniz
René Descartes
John Locke
Jean Jacques Rousseau
George Berkeley
Francis Bacon
Jeremy Bentham
Arthur Schopenhauer
William James
Charles Sanders Peirce
John Stuart Mill
Gottlob Frege

>>15693801
>>Hegel
>Absolutely worthless. Pass.
Why? I understand if you think him being a horrible writer would translate to him being a horrible debatists, but from refrences of the time, his speaking prowess was actually pretty bloody good. Most of his students were amazed by it.

>>15690978
Myself

>>15693850
>I understand if you think him being a horrible writer would translate to him being a horrible debatists
I don't really care about "debate skills" as such. It is mostly sophistical bullshit artistry. The ability to think clearly and logically is key, though, as well as the ability to express ideas concisely.

>but from refrences of the time, his speaking prowess was actually pretty bloody good. Most of his students were amazed by it.
That's a red flag right there. The ability to dazzle the plebs via obscurantist rhetoric is certainly powerful in the social sense. But I'd rather lose with dignity than win with sophistry.

>>15693671
I really don't disagree with anything you wrote here. I also specifically didn't have Diogenes debating anyone, rather wandering in and dragging someone away to lecture cause that's what he was known for.

>>15693801
>mentions Pierce

Based

>>15690978

Plato as he probably doesn't even know what a fallacy is. We might not win but it'd be hilarious.

>>15694013
Fuck phones. Peirce.

Voltaire easily. He was the best rhetorician of the bunch and one of the best who ever lived. Interesting question because he was the least philosophically sophisticated of the group, but he doesn't need to be. It's not like Candide took apart Leibniz's arguments, it just made the conclusion look stupid.

>>15694004
Ok I get that. I just get annoyed at people bring up diogenes like hes really that important, when he is almost exclusively brought up for shock value, "oh i cant believe he did that", and retorts rather than any philosophical merit of his own. I do not mean to imply that cynicism is stupid or false, just that Diogenes really didt add much to it and was just a follower of the school. It also doesnt help that I only usually here people talk about him who know next to nothing besides factorinos like Kant goes to bed sharply at 10pm every night.

>>15694028
Finally someone gets Voltaire. People still flanderize Leibniz's arguents even 300 years latter because of that fuck. If that doesnt show Voltaires rhetirical prowess, i dont know what does. Though rhetorical skill plus actual knowledge usually bets out rhetorical skill minus knowledge.

>>15691039
>you will never tag Plato into the ring and then watch him flying legdrop Marx off the ropes
Why actually continue to live bros

>>15694029
Lol. Yeah, he's a meme for a meme thread, friendo. I understand the general frustration though factoids are fun, but limited.

Kant because nobody would take the time to even listen to his dull autistic ramblings. By the time he finished setting up the premises of his argument all save for Hegel and Nietzsche would've offed themselves. From there I'd bring a horse into the room to send Nietzsche into a mental spiral and throw Kant's withered little shrimp body into Hegel, instantly shattering his brittle weak frame

>>15694028
>>15694053
Are we talking an ad hom shit-flinging match, or actual rational argumentation with the goal of attaining truth? If the former, you want someone like Sam Kinison or Bill O'Reilly, not anyone even marginally describable as a philosopher. The plebs respond to volume not logic.

>>15690978
Machiavelli hands down.
Realism triumps over everything else.

>>15692044
Marx and Nietzsche are the two most mentally ill people in that picture. They would both either self destruct simultaneously or turn on each other rambling in circles and interrupting each other, forgetting which of their byzantine aimless propositions they were spewing.

>>15691039
This is why I still come here.

>>15694028
He would get his ass handed to him by any modern comic. Can you imagine Voltaire debating Jon Leibowitz? Trevor Noah? Without getting slandered as a racist bigot homophobic anti-Semite. The best rhetorician would be someone like Hitler because he actually strikes fear into any debator while still being easily digestible for the pleb. Voltaire would make a snide remark then cry himself to sleep because he couldn't convince the masses of anything.

>>15694143
Anon, The title was for a debate, not necessarily get at the truth. Have you ever been on a debate team and you had to argue for something you dont believe in?

>>15690978

I don't need any of their help, they're all stupid and easily dispatched, to wit: communism doesn't work you dunce, try inspecting a woman's teeth you simpleton, stop encouraging others to be jerks you jerk, stop pretending you aren't a frail virgin, stop writing patent nonsense, stop going along with whatever Calvin wants, stop being short and autistic, stop beliving in fictions, and I don't know who you are but I know enough of you to know that you're full of shit too, so whatever brand of nonsense you're peddling, stop it. Stop it, stop it, stop it.

>>15694642
>Have you ever been on a debate team
No, but I saw a documentary about how it works in the US. What an embarrassment.

me nitch will just they have ressentimentalized christian morality and they're secret nihilists

>>15690978
marx might be good but the others probably wouldn't be ready to comprehend his paradigm. Aristotle, Machiavelli, Hobbes, and Voltaire were all retards. Plato might be good but his dialogues probably exaggerate how much rhetorical skill he really had ... hegel probably defeats kant, and hegel also probably defeats nietzsche, since all of nietzsche's schemes against hegel arose out of misunderstanding (not reading) hegel. So hegel defeats everyone, maybe not marx.

>>15690978
Marx, Neetshuh and Hegel don't count so I'll take Aristotle.

The One above all.

>>15690978
>a bunch of wh*tes
the debate is over already

>>15690978
I choose Nietzsche, he's already got the "me against the world"and has prepared ad Homs.

>>15694123
>I'd bring a horse into the room to send Nietzsche into a mental spiral and throw Kant's withered little shrimp body into Hegel, instantly shattering his brittle weak frame
KEK
>>15694151
>rambling in circles and interrupting each other, forgetting which of their byzantine aimless propositions they were spewing.
literally me

>>15694151
wasnt marx relatively sane compared to most philosophers? Nietzsche was batshit but he would probably win in a debate as roasting all prior philosophy is basically all he did in his life. The other guys were all fucking mental in one way or another. Maybe except for plato

>>15693801
Why is Aristotle the top dog?

>>15693801
>Jean Jacques Rousseau
>Francis Bacon
>Jeremy Bentham
>William James
>Charles Sanders Peirce
>John Stuart Mill
>Gottlob Frege
Why these?

>>15690978
Voltaire, Marx and Aristotle, all of the others except Hegel are stuttering autistic incels and would lose in a debate regardless of whether their intelligence was superior or not.

>>15693801
>prefering aristotles to plato

he was nothing but platos tsundere and biggest fangirl. He is shit conpared to the most influential philosopher of all time

>>15696132
Spoken like someone who's never read Aristotle and probably not Plato either.

>>15694123
>my sides
great thread

>>15696051
Yeah I don't know what he's on about, Marx was a complete normalfag except for the fact that he thought working was really gay.

>>15696157
>except for the fact that he thought working was really gay
Except, the opposite.

>>15696169
The end game was always to enable humans to work as little as possible.

>>15691039
Big brain move here.

>>15694028
This.

>>15692028
And who wins the debate if there's only one left standing?

>>15696252
Astute point. Did Machiavelli advise you to post that?

>>15696116
He was namedropping, which explains the fact that he named them even though we recognize them just by their last name. The only ones worth for debating the others that he mentioned are:
>Epicurus
>David Hume
>Gottfried Leibniz
>René Descartes
>John Locke
>Arthur Schopenhauer

>>15690978
I think pretty obviously Aristotle or Plato, Plato is the "greater" but considering his philosophy I'm not sure it would work the best in a debate, while Aristotle is the more scrutinous and considerating, I would think taking into account the characteristics of his philosophy in turn.

Marx is self explanatory, Nietzsche wasn't a good debater and his ad hom aphorisms only work on paper, Hegel would probably be somewhat likened to Plato in though being in this case the more important to Schopenhauer he would still probably suffer from being able to directly capture the spirit of his ideas in a debate rather than a lecture, whereas of course Schopenhauer was a much better arguer than Hegel and often beat him verbally. Kant seems to me like he was autistically accurate and though the greatest genius since Plato and both a fantastic orator and talker, his perfection in some areas seems to have been left out in other areas like his moral philosophy. Hobbes was great but I don't think really stands against the others on this list, as Marx also doesn't, and neither does Voltaire though at least the prior two are above that sophist. Machiavelli would be based and expert debater Entp department like Socrates but considering the primary subjects of his life, we would be unable to judge how well he would place in metaphysics.

Overall, either Aristotle or Kant, who seems like he would be a really fun guy to talk to.

>>15694018
>Plato as he probably doesn't even know what a fallacy is.
People actually think this.

>>15694148
>I'm a Realist
How does one respond to this verbal ploy of genius?

>>15696389
It's mostly "people" not actual normal humans

>>15692028
and Plato was known to be a democratic sissy diplomat? Please, the man was a beast on all fronts, none of these homos, especially the germans pictured would stand a chance in anyway against him.
Even if they were to prove him wrong by debating, that would only infuriate the madman to release the ape from within.

I would only take flowers to the graves of Macchiaveli and Hobbes. The rest can eat shit.

>>15695994
>they start
>Nietzsche proclaims loudly that he will go first
>he explains that he's prepared a least
>pulls a soggy piece of paper out while trying to make out the names
>he mumbles quietly while repeatedly stuttering
>"y.. y- argh a... a coward, and i- iftwasn t for l.. lays- lies! You woul..."
>Voltaire laughs to himself in the audience
>Nietzsche is broken, he thought they were friends without even knowing him, how could this be...
>Kant starts a lecture at the back of the room and everyone turns their chairs around.

>>15696427
>g*rms proving wrong plato in a debate when they haven't managed to do so after dedicating their entire lives to doing so 2000 years after plato's death

>>15696405
(((Deep)))!

>>15696450
it would make Big Plat go "OOOOOH OOOOOH! AAAAAA AAAAAA AAAAAAA!" as he crushed their gay bones

>>15696146
I have read most of platos dialogues and I have read some aristotles. I could not stand it. He is so minimal in his approach. He clearly tried to out-autism plato. His shit screamed "notice me senpai" in every sentence. He wanted to out do plato by being more complex which often comes of as artificial, forced and ill-reasoned. Overrated philosopher

>>15690978
aristotle, the father of logic

>>15696479
I advice that you drop that hubris next time you read philoophy and maybe you'll learn to appreciate the best thinkers in history

>>15696427
>Plato gets pissed and unleashes the Forms of Jericho on Marx

>>15691816
>I'm a Marxist

>>15696510
Nobody stants a chance against El Pithikos

>>15696516
>>15696450
>>15696394
>>15696389
kys

>>15694642
True. I took a debate course in college. I "won" every debate because the opponent always conceded to me, but afterward the professor would get all pissed off and be like "NO that's not how this works you should've called him out on x, y and z" to the opponent. One time it was his star pupil who was on the debate team that I beat, and he got really pissed off and then took it all out on her, poor girl lol. He gave me a C.

>>15696584
>cringe r*ddit humble brag
Kys for making people read your diarrhea

>>15690978
i see two greeks and 7 pseuds

>>15696611
I forgot to add the debate professor tore my ass apart after every debate about how I was hardly even able to make a coherent argument and basically conned my way through. The only brag here is that I may have a future in convincing retards of things.

>>15696505
People have too much respect. I have my own opinion on those people. I like plato and dislike aristotles. There is no objective truth to who had a "higher quality" philosophy. It is all subjective anyway. People who have too much reverence for "great minds" are limiting themselves and can never produce original ideas. Plato and aristotles were not divine. They were human. Being awestruck is a form of vanity. Hybris is advised

>>15696642
Ahh you're a pseud gotcha sorry for the misunderstanding

>>15691039
BASED

>>15696547
>kys

>>15696625
>And now?
>You should see 9 pseuds.

>>15690978
I'd pick Schopenhauer to debate all of those because of his work "Art of Being Right"

>>15696814
I see 10

>>15692044
>Freeze peach meme unironically
anon... I

>>15692231
>Nick Land triumphantly watches the scene unfold

>>15697223
>anon... I
Fuck of reddit there are no upvotes for your epic retarded jokes

>>15692044
>freeze peach.
Reddit.

>>15697435
Reddit. Poor attempt.

>>15697049
:(

Marx obviously

>>15690978
No matter what Nietzsche says he will undoubtedly win in his mind, and arrogance is all you really ever need in the pseudo-science of rhetoric.

>>15697889
They were all arrogant as fuck

>>15690978
I pick Machiavelli since he doesn't really belong on this list, and that means I get to debate everyone else and learn what they have to say. Debates are about learning, not about winning.

>>15698084
Ok pseud no wonder you didn't get machiavelli chad

>>15695823
t. Carl Benjamin

>>15695823
>duhh god n shit

>>15692044
Haven't read Marx, but Nietzsche was a moron and his writings are just emotional ramblings. All he could do is call others names.

Step aside fuckers, I got the winner right here. None of your continental faggots stands a chance against sheer logic and facts.

>>15692044
>Marx and Nietzsche take their places at the corners of the ring

>WAIT WHO’s THAT?

Smoke clears—

https://youtu.be/6v1FdXDGJG0

This fight is over

>>15697289
And then gets fucked in the ass