/lit/ - Literature

>>17424796
>or does he only think that because he is an anglo?

Ding ding ding!

>>17424796
Idk anon, I think people are pretty selfish tho. Especially poor people. The least selfish are the upper middle class. If it were a scale or selfishness it would be: elites, the poor, the wealthy, the working class, the middle class, and then the upper middle class.

>>17424796
You got it bruv

>>17424796
Bonjour anon,
im here to inform you, that this is only due to SOCIETY, man is inherently a good being.
Sincerely, french tard

>>17424796
>or does he only think that because he is an anglo?
All races are equal except anglos. These mofos have no soul, brits, americans, Nagel's thought experiment about the zombies was actually just him explaining how he and all other anglos think: they don't.

>>17424824
meant to reply to
>>17424812

>>17424824
>>17424833
I really really really don't like the French.

>>17424844
Are you an anglo?

>>17424824
>french tard
>>17424844

Rousseau wasn't French, tards.

>>17424860
shut up, he was white and his native tongue was french, that sums up to a french man

>>17424872
I repeat >>17424829 Burger-anglos have no soul

>>17424872

Kek, you people are literally less sentient than dogs.

>>17424796
>>17424801
>>17424815
>>17424872
>so much seething and still no refutation

>>17424898

>>17424796
I'm not an anglo and I can tell you that if there was no law I'd smash your head in. Sounds you like Hobbes was right afterall.

>>17424898

The only refutation I need is how you let yourself get jewed at every turn.

>>17424796
The idea of the peaceful, noble savage is fun, but the data just doesn't play it out. The Maori were constantly killing each other, the Tahitians were constantly killing each other, the Aborigines were constantly killing each other, the Mesoamericans were constantly killing each other.

>>17424829
>Nagel's thought experiment about the zombies
So this is how philosophical debates are settled now in Modern Academia.

>>17424860
>Rousseau wasn't French
What was he then?

>>17424824
>When a literal cuck tries to lecture you about human nature
I deeply hate this faggot

>>17424940
kek academic """philosophy""" is lost beyond hope

>>17424898
>so much bollox, still noh 'efutation

>>17424945

Ain't like you can't google this shit, but okay
"Rousseau was born in Geneva, which was at the time a city-state and a Protestant associate of the Swiss Confederacy. Since 1536, Geneva had been a Huguenot republic and the seat of Calvinism. {...} Rousseau was proud that his family, of the moyen order (or middle-class), had voting rights in the city. Throughout his life, he generally signed his books "Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Citizen of Geneva".

>>17424940

Anglos are not real people

>>17424962
Geneva is not an ethnicity.

>>17424962
Of course a fag of this magnitude would be Swiss

>>17424796
There is no natural condition because all conditions are natural. You were correct in pointing out that he's Anglo.

>>17424972
>Geneva is not an ethnicity.

Neither is "french", imbécile.

>>17424950
>>17424940
Cringe

>>17424978
Are you retarded? The state of nature is the state of man before society

>>17424983
Yes it is dumbass

>>17424978
>>17424988
Thats something I cant understand with Hobbs. How can you assume there was not always a "society". We always lived in groups and at some point we becam more sophisticated, thats it. Its all on a continuum not a before and after.

>>17424988

Man outside of society is a punctual accident, there is no historical point before which there is a man whose nature is to be asocial.
You could perhaps make the argument that civilization however is contrary to the natural social order.

>>17424988
>>17424796
It's literally impossible to know anything of the natural condition of man, as we are born in society and will never be able to escape it. Thus all our imaginations of it are shaped BY society.

>>17425004
>a group means a society

>>17424988
Monkeys have society, society existed before man and you already exist in society before you are born; society provides for your mother etc.
>muh blank slate
what if you anglos were the blank slate all along?

>>17425004
>Thats something I cant understand with Hobbs.
Then maybe you should read him you fucking retard.

>>17425008
>>17425004
>>17425008
It doesn't matter, whether this state has ever really existed. Its only a mental experiment to determine what man is at is core anthropologically.

>>17425014
>>17425024
Still did not refute my claim, keep seething faggots

>>17425023
Imagine you're by yourself. Your family died, you have no friends, you're not a citizen. You're all alone.
What the fuck is your society at this point?
Then you meet a person. You don't know who they are and what they want. He may shank you next second.
This is the state of nature.

>>17425032
Brainlet tier thinking. We re an inextricable component of society you dum dum

>>17425044
reason can transcend our current state and world

>>17425032
There is no core because there is no "man" in nature, this is a generalization we invented for the purpose of enforcing a certain ideal. Everyone is different and has their own "core" and that core is a constant like nature and never actually jeopardized.

>>17425039
This is after society, not before.

>>17425057
It's after and before because you no longer have a society at that point. Are you 0 IQ?

>>17425032
> In Nature, man is at war with man constantly
> There was never such a state in nature, we have always been both cooperating and conflicting with/against another.
> IT DOESN'T MATTER ITS A THOUGHT EXPERIMENT

I fucking swear

>>17424988
>society is outside nature
Why are Anglos like this?

>>17425054
>reason can transcend our nature
Not really, I don't think so

>>17425074
I've still grown up in one and informed by this how to interact with the stranger

>>17425077
>Why are Anglos like this?

Their society is ugly and goes against nature.

>>17424796
From perspective of England in 17th century, with some knowledge of history you could deduct the same. English civil war was perhaps brutal, but nowhere near War of the Roses. The aristocrats of the 1200's were basically training combat all their life while the ones in 17th century became much more of a "gentlemen", I don't know how much did Hobbes know about historical homicide rates, but if he knew anything he would know that it was also dropping(perhaps in form of folk wisdom in "my grandpa used to say that in his times if someone called him bad name he'd stab him with a knife on the spot" trivia).

Given that he was a supporter of rather linear model of history, knowing the relatively close history and the present was enough for him to constitute that in obscure, prehistoric times, the willingness of cooperation was smaller and conflicts were more common. When this reasoning is brought to the beginning of human race, the conclusion of these developments is indeed a "war of every man against every man".

That being said it's not that central point of Leviathan.

>>17425088
How do you act?

>>17425097

Cautious, yet polite and friendly. I offer cooperation if I can so that he can see value in my continued existence, but ask something in return so that he understand also that I won't be his bitch.

>>17425106
What if he's armed with a sharp rock and appears to want what you have?

>>17425091
Yes, but this reasoning doesn't prove anything. The only history we know of, has already had society in them. It is simply naive to conclude that the reason for the violence is man and not society.

>>17425120

If I can talk down drunken violent jarheads who just caught their girl cheating from starting a fight, I can talk down a hungry hobo with a sharp rock.

>>17425128
>The only history we know of, has already had society in them.
I wonder why this coincidence happened? Why did they all make these societies that seem to only produce violence.

>>17425139
Not who you replied to, but they don't only produce violence and life outside human societies is full of violence.

>>17425134
>if i can talk down a member of my own society I sure can talk down a hungry barbarian who is beholden by no laws and no state
Sounds like you'd be part of the group who wouldn't survive till larger socities end up forming.

>>17425160
>a member of my own society

Jarheads have the sentience of a monkey tho.

>>17424824
i mean... if war against everyone was the natural condition, we wouldn't have any societies... just retards who don't dare to fight against tyranny and greed, instead letting narcissists to rule over them.

>>17424796
>>17424824
>>17424988
I'm reading Christopher Columbus's The Four Voyages. Some of the natives, like those of Hispaniola, who lived under a king, were remarkably magnanimous, according to Columbus's own reckoning:
>I assure your Highnesses that nowhere in Castile would one receive such great kindness or anything like it.
>And he and everyone else in the land wept for our misfortune as if greatly concerned by it. They are so affection and have so little greed and are in all ways so amenable that I assure...that there is in my opinion no better people and no better land in the world. They love their neighbors as themselves and their way of speaking is the sweetest in the world, always gentle and smiling.
Others, like the Caribs, were rather barbaric, according to the introduction by the translator:
>The Arawaks at first welcomed the newcomers..., hoping for their protection from the marauding Caribs, who descended on them from the Leeward Islands to steal women and castrate and fatten their young men for food.
I'm a third of the way through the book and I've yet to find any mention of the Caribs having a state, so there's that.

>>17425204
>t. didn't read hobbes

>>17425128
Missing the point. Based on what Hobbes could know, his way of thinking was good, based on what he couldn't know, it was decent. Sure more sophistication would be required if we really went into trying to iron out his model(you could assume Hobbes could reach similar conclusions if he lived in early imperial Rome, perhaps), but Leviathan isn't really about philosophy of history, so the simplifications there are kind of irrelevant.
The argument that we "don't know how the humanity was before *society*" is double edged weapon really. They may have been hippies singing kumbayah or genocidal maniacs, if we don't know then either of these is a good bet. Of course we know, thanks to biologists, much more about social animals than Hobbes could ever dream of, so you have to assume that some degree of cooperativeness must have been present among early humans or pre-humans(most likely cooperativeness within the group and hostility outside of it), but again, that's neither here nor there. From the perspective of Hobbes, earth has 6000 years and man was created practically out of nothing on day 7.

>>17425231
>day 7.
or was it 5? I forgot

>>17425231
based effortpost.
Could you post some links to modern research on social animals? Sounds very interesting

>>17425231
>Of course we know, thanks to biologists, much more about social animals than Hobbes could ever dream of,
Yeah, I'm sure Hobbes didn't ever observe a hive of bees or a pack of wolves, conclusions reached from such evidence are thanks to the novel work of "biologists." Is this the power of science worshippers?

>>17425251
I just watched bunch of documentaries on chimpanzee(common chimp I think is pretty much the way you'd expect some kind of homo xxxx to be as far as his social life looked like), so sadly I can't. For semi-civilised humans you can read "War before Civilisation" although it mostly concerns already agricultural societies.
>>17425282
He didn't observe primates and that's probably the biggest deal here.

>>17424796
>does he only think that because he is an anglo?
correct.
every single nation that is near england has been under an attempted genocide by england, though all failed.
even during times of over 100 years of peace the english attempted to exterminate the scots during the 13th-14th century .

>>17425294
>>17425231
/thread
Came here to say something like this. But this anon beat me to it.

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/389530.Chimpanzee_Politics

This book is kinda cool if anyone is interested, and there are a lot of articles available that report the behavior of chimps throughout years. I can't remember the name of any from the top of my head, but they shouldn't be too hard to find.

>>17425242
Day 6. He created the birds and fish on day 5 and rested on the day 7.

>>17424796
The natural condition of man is to be essentially man. This is prior to any other natural state and this natural state in itself does not entail that every man should be in a state of war against every other man, neither does it entail that man should by his mere existence exist in a cooperative state in relation to another man. Hobbes makes a categorical error in thinking that such a state of war or not war applies to man's nature, it is only contingent.

>>17425316
Why are anglos like this? When did they become expansiinist cunts? What was the tipping point where they went from living in the trees and getting btfo by rome to conquering most of the world?

>>17425334
Shalom shabbat

>>17424945
Ignore the guy saying Geneva, I'm the one who said Rousseau wasnt french. He was clearly a jew, just look at his name. It's literally Rosenwasser translated into shitty French. Rosenberg, Rosenzweig, and Rousseau aka. Rosenwasser.

>>17425349

The formation of the City of London Corporation, so around 1046.

>>17425371
>da jooz
take your meds schizo

>>17425373
Redpill me on this. Is the centralization of power the key to world dominance?

>>17425371
Nah. He was simpky a cuck.

>>17425349
>Anglos
>getting btfo by Rome
I don’t think the angles, saxons, or jutes had much contact with Rome. In fact that is indicative of the change, southern Great Britain was invaded and settled by a large number of Germanic/danish tribesmen who subsequently interbred with the local Britons, the german+brit mutts are the ones who started subjugation then themselves were subjugated by the normans, and it’s the Norman ruling class that has driven the expansionism.

>>17425014
What is a society

>>17425349
>hat was the tipping point where they went from living in the trees and getting btfo by rome to
England nor the English existed at the time of Rome/

>>17425387

More like the centralization of various Éminences Grises into one entity which is given technical sovereignty over a fictional territory (but really allowing them to write their own finance laws) given the understanding that all accumulated power is nominally under the authority of the crown (and there is no challenge to Temple legislature).
Anglos were the second (first being the Catholic Church) to set up such a shadow government (and the Church obviously had to tangle with the fact that it wasn't tied to a specific nation). Really the worst joke of this timeline is the the Protocols weren't right about the Jews at the time (but it became later on) but was entirely right about the City of London corporation, to the point where it seems to me obvious they were set up as a psyops in order to deflect blame from Anglos to the Jews, and it worked, and now it actually became true also about Jews, so it will be even more difficult to realize how destructive the Anglos influence has been historically...

>>17425386
>>17425393
if you want a source:
geocities dot ws/films4/contractsocial.htm

you have to be an aryan and know german though.

>won two world wars
>ruled over the largest empire in history
>the pinnacle of european culture with milton, byron, shakespeare, marlowe, chaucer
>created modern political philosophy with locke hobbes and burke
>codified the scientific method
>the birthplace of the industrial revolution.
>invented calculus, newtonian physics, and darwinian biology
>still skipping over minor achievements that would otherwise be the crowning jewel of other cultures
No wonder the Brits make the entire world seethe

>>17425505
>>won two world wars
no one won the world wars.
>ruled over the largest empire in history
most of the work was done by scots
>>the pinnacle of european culture with milton, byron, shakespeare, marlowe, chaucer
all of whom have been beaten by scots again in the english language
>codified the scientific method
just no
>the birthplace of the industrial revolution.
strange way to spell scotland but anyway
>invented calculus, newtonian physics, and darwinian biology
wrong and the last 2 were just excuses to justify extreme capitalism

>>17425525
It appears that my superiority led to some controversy

>>17424796
He was an Anglo who lived through the horror of civil war. Makes sense for him to be pessimistic.

>>17425505
>>won two world wars
> Realized g*rms were threatening the pinnacle of civilization and offered their meaningless lives in tribute to the altar of the French Nation.

ftfy

>>17425057
? This is after, in, and before society

>>17425574
This too.

>>17425624
>>17425624
Shut the fuck up cretins he wrote most of the ideas in Leviathan before the civil war.

>>17424796

He lived in a context of civil war, like folks mentioned here. He was also confirmed to have been a weakling in a literal sense, had lots of health problems, and was most likely bullied at several points in life. This clearly skewed his views toward pessimism, more than being Anglo.

His defense of a Leviathan, however, has more to it than just claiming the doctrine of the divine right of kings or containment of man's natural condition. He also proposed, using a less mathy language of course, that a global aggregator of wealth would no longer have any interest in putting others down to acquire more wealth - therefore, someone who had control of every resource would be the only agent capable of acting with no self-interest towards the preservation of such wealth, i.e, no longer in need of preserving his ownership but preserving the resources themselves - for instance, by conceding fair use to others through borrowing and so on. Granted, this particular argument would require at the time of his life the use of the doctrine of the divine right, but Hobbes' Leviathan is quite popular among Neocameralists and other kinds of Neoractionary thought since today we might as well claim machine learning can act as a global moderator of resources in place of a person (Ave machina if you will)

>>17425631

The conditions which brought about the civil war existed for years before and his own personal life was quite troubled as well

>>17425675
>he didn't mean that he just lacked self-awareness of who he was!
I guarantee you that Hobbes is at least 30 IQ points above you.

>>17425685
Fuck off with your retarded psychological analysis lmao you're such a retard. He put arguments forth, keep your ad hominem for your shitty philosophy essays

>>17424796
He thinks that because he lived in a period of civil war.

>>17425705
Kill yourself, retard. Literally first google result

>In 1640, with England on the brink of civil war, the Royalist Hobbes fled to Paris, fearing the reaction of the Long Parliament to his writing. He remained in exile for 11 years. ... In 1651, Hobbes' best-known work 'Leviathan' or, 'The Matter, Form, and Power of a Commonwealth Ecclesiastical and Civil' was published.

>Nooo fighting is not inherent within every universal aspect. You must except humans from divine higher law because we have le big brain

>>17425735
Yes it was published after the civil war, but he wrote it over two decades and most of the ideas had already been published before. Maybe read his autobiography instead of posting retarded wikipedia shit you dumb faggot.

Yes it is, and that's a good thing

A lion doesn't concern himself with the opinion of sheep (nations that are shit at war).

>>17425762
>divine higher law
How do you know it?

>>17425373
>>17425466
I need to know more. What are the best books on his subject?

>>17425466
I agree with everything you've said except your strong delineation between the anglo and jewish financial forces at the time of writing of the protocols. Hadn't we already seen the jewish Rothschild inordinate influence on England since the Napoleonic era and height of the gold standard, and the jewish Sassoon's influence on foreign policy since the Opium Wars? They certainly consolidated power over England by the time of the World Wars, and the protocols were only published in 1903.

>>17425705

Wai what, why are you projecting? That's not ad hominem at all. You really think the circumstances of one's life would not affect one's viewpoint? Just like you have daddy issues and think everyone on the internet is hateful like you are

>>17425870
> Just like you have daddy issues and think everyone on the internet is hateful like you are
See? That's happens when you try to judge ideas based on assumptions. It's post hoc rationalisation for whatever you want to show. Try to engage with his philosophy someday, but first you have to read the book you useless faggot.

>>17424796
He does just think that because he's an Anglo, but he happens to be right. You get wiped out or you wipe out, there is no peace: only war.

Does anybody have the leviathan gif where the swords collide? Also could they explain it?

>>17425091
>The aristocrats of the 1200's were basically training combat all their life while the ones in 17th century became much more of a "gentlemen"

I don't believe the whole idea that the aristocrats of antiquity were there because of being skilled warriors and later gents, blood and iron become coal and iron etc. but I'm open to the idea. Point me to somewhere that maybe talks about this? Some historical evidence?

>>17426077
This. People don't realise that the state of nature never left us.

>>17426084
The explanation is that Rousseau is a homosexual and Hobbes is a chad.

>>17425505
>won two world wars
That was russia
>ruled over the largest empire in history
That was mongolia
>the pinnacle of european culture with milton, byron, shakespeare, marlowe, chaucer
Dope, but ireland, france and germany has better writers.
>created modern political philosophy with locke hobbes and burke
Had the shittiest philosophers
>codified the scientific method
and has thought about nothing else since
>the birthplace of the industrial revolution.
That was all of western europe
>invented calculus, newtonian physics, and darwinian biology
Calculus was invented by Leibniz
>still skipping over not having a soul

>>17426340
>That was mongolia
Anon, calculating geographical areas is a solved problem, not something that you debate on 4chan.

Anglos are just a degenerated form of the superior german and scandinavian race - i say it again, anglos are the only lower race, no matter if you are german, hindu, turk or jew you will know that the anglo is lower than you.

>>17426382
Kike detected

>>17426389
Anglo detected

>>17425371
Rousseau is a normal French name you crazy fuck.

>>17424796
homer says in scroll 3

Who, then, sir strangers, are you, and from what port have you sailed? Are you traders? or do you sail the seas as rovers with your hand against every man, and every man’s hand against you?”

in my opinion hobbes draws much wisdom from homer,hobbes even translated homer

>>17424824
>man is inherently a good being.
no

>>17425371
You're the kind of guy who thinks Hitler was a Jew because his grandmother was named Schicklgruber.

>>17426682
Every worthwhile thinker dras wisdom from Homer.
But Homer there draws wisdom from Mycenean times when pirates were commonplace.

>>17426716
>his grandmother was named Schlockgobbler.

someone said it before i thought of it
No way i could know it, but it is true then

>>17426254
Based anon, thank you. So the little guy is Rousseau trying to fight the Leviathan with his "muh humans are good natured at birth"?

>>17424824
Whatever you think of Hobbes this is infinitely more retarded.

>>17426984
Yeah, it's just about that debate where Enlightenment sophists were seething at Hobbes for being more intelligent than them.

>>17424796
Humans live, hunt and fight in groups, so the natural condition is probably every group of men against every group of men, and the degree and frequency of war would change based on circumstances.
Those who still believe in the Noble Savage are projecting on primitive peoples their leftist, pacifist, hippie ideals in hope of "proving" this is the natural way, while ignoring the facts, knowingly or out of ignorance. I think you can really see that with hippies who apparently think Native Americans were non violent vegans smoking pot and having sex with everyone all day.
Though a lot of groups had food sharing and were largely egalitarian, and all evidence points that their lives were not "nasty brutish and short" and they had health unimaginable to us (Read Weston Price).

>>17425225
>castrate and fatten their young men for food
based

>>17425373
>>17425466
Consider also what was happening to England generally in the 11th century. What a superficial understanding of the Norman conquest ignores is the fact that the Anglo-Saxon world had already been thoroughly conquered 50 years before, by William's Danish cousins. The old feudal order was subjected to this foreign, Christianized but still very "viking" military order. Edward the Confessor and Harold Godwinson were a brief native interruption to the foreign conquest, not the last of the old order. That order was wiped away in 1013. William's literally genocidal war against the Anglo-Saxon nobility and the creation of the Domesday book finalized England as a fief more centralized than any territory its size in Latin Christendom. So man in England alone, even by the late 11th century, was an individual person with legal rights and privileges (or lack thereof) vis-a-vis something like a state.

>>17427206
so a wolfs life is not nasty brutish and short?

>>17427241

Not really.
If anything that describe the lives of foxes in urban areas.

>>17427446
the wolf, a pack animal that hunts and fights in groups, so the natural condition is probably every group of wolves against every group of wolves, and the degree and frequency of war would change based on circumstance

>>17424812

The poor are animals, the middle class are niggercattle. The elites are lions? Birds of prey?

>>17427525
the noble altruistic wolf who shares the kill with the whole pack...

It's the natural condition when order breaks down

He was wrong. The natural state of mankind is band level social organization. Basically groups of 20-40 people, mostly parents and children in a bunch of families, living cooperatively. Clan organization (lineages of individuals spread across different bands) keeps them from inbreeding. If people get pissed off enough with each other they just leave and go join another band instead of killing each other mostly. Bands sometimes unite to form tribes but that's usually when there's something unusual about their foodgetting, like they set up shop around a food source that's bountiful all year long or something. Tribes sometimes wage low-level wars that last hundreds of years because of murders and stuff like that, but it's mostly symbolic warfare and not many people die or get hurt. Tribes sometimes unite with other tribes to form chiefdoms and that's when war as we know it really gets going, but chiefdoms are pretty sophisticated and require a lot of ideology and material conditions, and are very recent development. Life was violent back in prehistory, probably more violent than today, but to suggest it was individualistic or totally violent or defined by warfare isn't true.

>>17430743
>it's mostly symbolic warfare and not many people die or get hurt
https://ourworldindata.org/ethnographic-and-archaeological-evidence-on-violent-deaths#share-of-violent-deaths-in-prehistoric-archeological-state-and-non-state-societies
big dummy.

>>17430899
>be in band with 20 people
>2 people get in an argument and kill each other
>10% of your population just died by violence
>be in state of 300,000,000 people
>2 people get in an argument and kill each other
>What percentage is that even?

Apples and oranges.

Even chimpanzees do politics, he is just wrong.

>>17430946
They do get at 'war' too, but still it is not pure chaos.

>>17424796
as everyone else that is not infected by some mind virus he is in part correct and in part wrong.