/lit/ - Literature

whitehead is cringe but otherwise this lineup is patrician

>>16714358
t. someone who has never read any of them

Whitehead is perfectly consistent with the ideals of pragmatism. Also Gramsci is easily the cringiest of any of them even if you agree with him

>>16714352
for the longest time I though John Dewey invented the dewey decimal system

>>16714364
why don't you like gramsci?

What is this supposed to mean

>>16714352
am i based? am i cringe? only /lit/ can tell (please don't tell me I'm cringe I had to change my whole philosophy the other time)

>>16714551
>leaidsman

>>16714551
Weil, Pascal, Heidegger and the J I share (though H I'm discovering right now). Can you explain to me the others please?

>>16714575
I'll do it with one quote for each one because I'm too lazy to summarise their thoughts and I'm about to go to bed. Starting from the top left corner:
>Leopardi
“Everything that is ended, everything that is last, naturally awakens in man a feeling of sorrow and melancholy. At the same time, it excites a pleasurable feeling, pleasurable in that very sorrow, and that is because of the infiniteness of the idea that is contained in the words ended, last, etc. ( Thus by their nature such words are, and always will be, poetic, however ordinary and common they are, in whatever language and style.)”
>Baudrillard
“Everywhere one seeks to produce meaning, to make the world signify, to render it visible. We are not, however, in danger of lacking meaning; quite the contrary, we are gorged with meaning and it is killing us.”
>Heraclitus
“The unlike is joined together, and from differences results the most beautiful harmony.”
>Hans Jonas
"Nothing could tempt the might of Prometheus unbound more than the dream of the highest earthly good believed within its reach, and nothing can become more dangerous to mankind than a mistaken pursuit of it."
>Foucault
“Where there is power, there is resistance.”

>>16714797
Thank you for the effort but I can go on wikiquote you know. I meant, what do you find interesting in each.

>>16714797
But I didn't know Hans Jonas so thank you anyways.

deleuze hegel deleuze
hegel deleuze hegel
deleuze hegel deleuze

>>16714366
Same

>>16714486
https://bighugelabs.com/mosaic.php

>>16714352
>heraclitus
>spinoza
>bergson
>lovecraft
>simondon
>deleuze
>flusser
>land
>delanda

>>16714352
I know all of them except the middle. Who is it?

>epicurus
>machiavelli
>hobbes
>spinoza
>stirner
>Nietzsche
>althusser
>deleuze
>delanda

>>16715765
>Stirner-Hobbes synthesis
huh?

bump

>>16714352
>Schopenhauer
>Nietzsche
>Spengler
>Heraclitus
>Goethe
>Wagner
>Kant
>Plato
>Hume

>Sextus Empiricus
>Plotinus
>Socrates
>Heraclitus
>Plato
>Kant
>Hegel
>Peirce
>Wittgenstein/Deleuze

Haven't read Deleuze but it reads like that mf retroactively plagiarized my thoughts

>>16716400
off the charts

>>16715560
reddit as fuck

>>16716400
>Hume
cringe

>>16716645
More for historical interest and importance my dear anon. I’m far more heavily influenced by the Germans and Greeks I’ve listed.

>>16715765
Based and encounter-pilled

>>16716639
I am simply too based for this realm
>>16716645
Hume is at the very least interesting, even if Kant was correct in his critiques of him

"I change too quickly: my today refutes my yesterday. When I ascend I often jump over steps, and no step forgives me that."

>>16717420
who top left and top right?

>>16717587
Empedocles and Diogenes of Sinope

>>16714352
All except Montaigne and Peirce are irredeemable trash

>>16714352
The final understanding.

>>16717649
Who are top middle top right middle eight and bottom left

>>16714352
4/10 the middle row is terrible

>>16714551
Based 8/10

>>16715046
7/10

>>16715560
3/10

>>16715765
1/10

>>16716400
5/10

>>16716411
6/10

>>16717420
4/10

>>16717624
3/10

>>16717635
8/10

>>16717647
6/10

>>16717635
names please

>>16717624
pseud

>>16717647
based and big-nosed

>>16717726
Lao Tzu
Gautama Buddha
Socrates
Jesus
Kierkegaard
Ramakrishna
Nietzsche
Weininger
Kevin Solway

>>16717731
being a pseud is way better than being a "well read" food for worm.

>>16717624
Is that Eraserhead?

>>16715046
>Zubiri
patricio

>>16717701
Koyré, Caillois, Ludwig Derleth, and Hugo Ball

Give me philosopher recommendations

(husserl, hegel, meinong, agrippa, boehme, John Dee, Kenneth grant, Iamblichus, Bertiaux, Abhinavagupta, deleuze, gikatila, Linji, abulafia, merleu-ponty, Ge-Hong)

>>16718244
How old are you?
And why the fuck your taste is so elitist?

>>16718264
he is an 18 avant teen

>>16718244
Remove Meinong.

>>16718264

I don’t know if elitist is the right term, I like large ontological models and consistency and these models all fit my mystical and occult and phenomenological interests. Linji is pretty accessible I think.

>>16718276

Meinong’s object theory is very important to my ontology especially how Edward Zalta interprets him.

>>16718271

Nah I’m married and have kids.

>>16718289
>Nah I’m married and have kids.
>still on 4chin
You have already failed as a husband and a father

>>16718377

Nah I’m a gypo in my culture a good husband and father cheats on his wife and routinely beats his children and makes sure his children don’t learn how to read. Kek

Now give book Recommendations

>>16718399
where are you from

>>16718412

New York City born and raised but family constantly goes back and forth between Europe, we left Russia because of basically communism

>>16718399
Kek.
I am from Pakistan, here philosophy and poetry are seen as one. People don't give a shit about prose because most of the Punjabi culture is oral(which is disappearing at the light speed) so the folklore carry the remaining philosophical aspects. But I can only recommend you the finest poets from few languages.

Punjabi
>Waris Shah

Sindhi
>Shah Abdul Latif Bhittai

Pashto
>Rahman Baba

Urdu
>Mir Taqi Mir
>Meeraji(A disciple of Baudelaire)

>>16715046
>Lonergan

Based. the inclusion of him automatically makes this the best in the thread

>>16718543

I’ll look into them but I know the problems translation can give, don’t get me wrong I like a lot of poetry and believe there’s philosophical value in it. I think I’ll actually read all of these because I can’t find any complete collections, so I’ll have to make do with the few poems translated, unless you can point to me to some collections of course.

Shah Abdul Latif Bhittai and Meeraji seem most interesting.

>>16718772
Unfortunately, there aren't many translation available on the internet. But you can find few poems floating in some obscure corner of the internet with average to shit translation. Meeraji is an obscure poet even for the well read Urdu readers. So there isn't much English translation available on the internet. You can find few poems of Rehman Baba.

Waris Shah's magnum opus "Heer Ranjha":
>http://apnaorg.com/books/english/heer-sekhon/book.php?fldr=book

A brief article on Meeraji:
>https://www.thebeacon.in/2019/11/09/queer-hauntings-of-a-vagrant-heart-mirajis-poetic-visions/

Shah Abdul Latif Bhittai
>http://apnaorg.com/books/english/shah-jo-risalo/book.php?fldr=book

>>16719029

Thanks I’ll save and read all of these

>>16718495
Are you raising your kids civilized or are you having them street fight young already?

>>16714352

bump

1. Schopenhauer
2. Confucius
3. Hume
4. Epictitus
5. St. Augustine
6. Evola
7. Nozick
8. Kastrup
9. Chalmers

what has a philosopher taught you that you didn't already know?

Row 1: Plato, Plotinus, Kant, Heidegger
Row 2: Nietzsche, Deleuze, Boehme, Schelling
Row 3: Girard, Meister Eckhart, Hegel, Ponty
Row 4: Lacan, Spinoza, Agamben, Foucault

>>16723242
>3x3=4x4

>>16723242
Can I have a quick rundown on Agamben?

>>16723242
Plato, Plotinus, Boehme, Eckhart, Girard are great. But how do you reconcile them with people like Nietzsche, Deleuze, Spinoza?

>>16720918
I see you like peepee in the poopoo

>Lao Tzu
>Buddha
>Aristotle
>Epictetus
>Kant
>Hegel
>Marx
>Nietzsche
>Adorno
>Sartre

Objective btw

>>16723707
Girard is easily reconcilable with Deleuze/Nietzsche. What is mimetic desire if not an essentially reactive force, the connections between model and subject and master and slave, etc... I find Eckhart and Bohme interesting for their mystical theosophy which I find has implications for philosophy of the Will. I don't necessarily adhere to any one philosophers' positions, and some I agree with more than others.

>>16723242
Very interesting chart, but can you please explain the appeal of Lacan in this context? Genuinely curious

>>16718244
Be still my heart, someone else appreciates Meinong these days

I'll rate more when someone else rates, you guys are just posting pictures with no comments and its lazy.

>>16715046
aluno do COF/10

>>16723242
holy cringe

>>16718289
>Meinong’s object theory
That non-existent objects subsist in a realm of their own? Kek he was used as a strawman in my philosophy of language class to motivate Russell's theory of description. Can you elaborate on how his theory is important?