/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.11537072]

When will the next big school of philosophy emerge?

[Anonymous No.11537287]

In a few years STEM/scientism will undergo a big critique that picks up steam and becomes trendy, and out of that critique a kind of vague will emerge a neo-naturalism that vaguely incorporates "reenchantment" themes and some kind of panpsychism. Probably pushed by someone who is trendy, a Zizek celeb type (who is also a reenchant-y panpsychist neo-naturalist of exactly this kind, btw), but it'll mix with the general willingness to listen to Petersons and will become a kind of Mega-Peterson or Mega-Zizek on par with Elon Musk. It will incorporate and subsume a lot of new age vibes and tendencies toward oriental mystery religions that are popular these days, and a lot of environmentalist movements, while still remaining a fundamentally neoliberal and instrumental toward science but masquerading as a post-naive "gentle science" or "humanized science" that has finally discarded the outmoded shell of the stodgy 20th century positivists.

It will masquerade as supremely humanist through its combination of panpsychism, buddhism, and general "therapeutic" existentialism, as well as its seeming friendliness to eclecticism and other brands of spiritual seekers, but ultimately it will be antihumanist and prevent agendas of legitimate transcendence or "große Politik" in Nietzsche's sense. Instead it will be the worst combination of all the things Nietzsche talked about in the notes for Will to Power: all of the pathologies of stagnant modernity he diagnoses, but masquerading as post-modern, no longer naive, "therapeutically" purified of the pangs and pathologies of modernity. It will justify transhumanism and drugging consciousness into submission and the universal slave economy via UBI, and within a generation or two, real humanity will be replaced by something as evil and as ugly as a cyberpunk dystopia but that looks on the surface something more like current Los Angeles looks, just a shithole filled with indistinguishable hedonistic retards who can barely think or talk, except they'll be happier and they'll all be RFID'ed and put cell phones in their eyes or brains, and prolefeed production will dialectically interlace with their basest brain impulses to become one indistinguishable structure. Probably the third world will be turned quietly into the Deltas from Brave New World mixed with 1984's quadrilateral zone (the ultimate phase of Lenin's imperialism).

Within 50 years the race is separated between a caste of ruddy miscegenated drones and in vitro genetically engineered rich superhumans who are all over 6 feet with elfin features and flawless skin they all live until 140. Slowly there will be a return to feudalism where the waifish supermen softly own all the pacified goblinoids who can no longer think, and whatever aliens were observing us from the edge of the solar system will say "aw fuck they lapsed into Great Filter Scenario #5, for a century or two there you could see their psychic energy really getting ready to take the next step."

[Anonymous No.11537294]

>>11537072
Thomism, Natural Law Theory, and Virtue Ethics

[Anonymous No.11537305]

>>11537072
It already has, bithc.

[Anonymous No.11537328]

Neoanimism

[Anonymous No.11537444]

>>11537305
Autism the photo.

[Anonymous No.11537541]

>>11537287
nice

[Anonymous No.11537586]

wash-your-penis school of philosophy

[Anonymous No.11537602]

Absolute Sadlerism

[Anonymous No.11537620]

>>11537287
So we're to be Dark Eldar or something from 40k?

[Anonymous No.11537621]

>>11537072
never

[Anonymous No.11537622]

>>11537294
This. Along with Catholic Integralism in political philosophy. Basically a comprehensive Catholic world system.

[Anonymous No.11537623]

>>11537072
Never

[Anonymous No.11537625]

>>11537586
the person who comes up with this scheme deserves $90k via patreon donations

[Anonymous No.11537626]

>>11537287
Started off pretty sensible but gradually became bullshit.

[Anonymous No.11537640]

>>11537305
richard feynman is looking rough

[Anonymous No.11537643]

PEOPLE SAY THAT DESCARTES WAS FULL OF SHIT BECAUSE HE BELIEVED IN SOULS AND GOD WITHOUT "ANY EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE".

LITTLE DO THEY FUCKING KNOW THAT DESCARTES WAS ARGUING IN THE CONTEXT OF SKEPTICS, WHO DOUBTED EVERYTHING.

>See that thing in my field of vision... I doubt it...

SO, THIS GUY, DESCARTES, A REAL SCIENTIFIC FELLA. SO HE SUPPOSEDLY MEDITATED AND REALISED THAT THE COGITO (THE SELF OR THE MIND) IS UNDOUBTABLE.

>W-well, I... Um... uh...

NO ONE CAN DOUBT THEMSELVES. THAT IS AN IMPOSSIBLE POSITION TO TAKE. "I THINK THEREFORE I AM" IS ALL ABOUT THE EXISTENCE OF THE MIND. BUT IS THIS MIND MATERIAL? IS IT JUST A BRAIN OR A PINEAL GLAND?

NO. THE MIND IS A 'SOUL', BECAUSE IT CAN'T BE MERE MATTER, BECAUSE ALL MATTER OUTSIDE OF THE MIND IS DOUBTABLE, RIGHT? THIS IS WHY HE CAME UP WITH A 'SOUL' - SOMETHING ABOVE THE MATERIAL.

NEVER LET THEM BREAK YOU DOWN FOR BEING A 'DUALIST'. REALISE THAT TO BELIEVE IN MATTER, TO BELIEVE IN THE OUTSIDE WORLD, ONE MUST BELIEVE IN SOMETHING THAT IS NOT OF THIS OUTSIDE WORLD, OR NOT OF THIS MATTER.

[Anonymous No.11537657]

"I ALONE AM CORPOREAL," SAYS MAX STIRNER.

I HAVE LONG AGO SYNTHESISED EGOISM WITH SOLIPSISM. I TAKE DESCARTES' COGITO FOR MYSELF, BECAUSE I AM THE CENTRE OF THIS WORLD. I NOW MAKE NO DISTINCTION BETWEEN MATTER OR NON-MATTER, BECOMING, IRONICALLY, A PHYSICALIST OR REDUCTIONIST.

ALL SUPERVENE ON THE PRINCIPLES OF 'ME'.

[Anonymous No.11537673]

when I publish my debut.

[Anonymous No.11537723]

>>11537287
Oh, fuck off. You just reiterated the background of the sexual revolution and passed it off like it's some quasi-apocalyptic prophesy of doom. It's the positive psychology trend, refurbishing Eastern philosophy for a slave labour market. Don't act like the fall hasn't already happened. Why don't we try to look for a more constructive philosophy in the aftermath, since we don't have any further left to sink.

[Anonymous No.11537794]

>>11537072
When people like this asshole >>>>11537287

- Understand the laws of physics and how they dominate the limits of growth in our universe,

- Understand that our motivations and decisions, our whole concept of reality, are influenced by our senses and our surroundings, as well as manipulated by our unconscious will to live and grow as individuals if not as species, like those of other living beings.

- Understands that important human behaviors at their root are predictable and therefore meaningless in anything other than an evolutionary (Live & Grow) sense

[Anonymous No.11537813]

>>11537794
But we already have that kind of reductionism

[Anonymous No.11537864]

>>11537072
look up object oriented ontology

[Anonymous No.11537880]

>prize-winning LGBTQ novelist
>the most prominent philosopher of today, literally right now
Garcianism is coming lads.

[Anonymous No.11537888]

>>11537880
Looks like a crotch

[Anonymous No.11537889]

>>11537287
Almost there, but idealism is a better contender than panpsychism.

Idealism - or universal consciousness - is going to rival materialism, mark my words. The hard problem of consciousness and the measurement problem in QM will lead us there.

[Anonymous No.11537896]

>>11537864
basically a precursor to this >>11537072

object-oriented ontology/deep ecology meets non commutative quantum psychology and the quantum revolution in social sciences, combine with psychedelic renaissance, spur global new right eco-totalitarianism

[Anonymous No.11537950]

In the 22nd century, the West will broadly be split into two philosophical camps: neoreactionary anti-democratic metaphysical idealist spiritualist radical accelerationists and atheist materialist humanist ethical transhumanist AI-rights advocates. The former will prevail.

[Anonymous No.11537971]

>>11537896
>global new right eco-totalitarianism
I unironically like the sound of this. Which books should I read for a primer?

[Anonymous No.11537975]

>>11537950
>in the 22nd
It's already like that, anonimo.

[Anonymous No.11538086]

if the sjw´s loses the culture war

[Anonymous No.11538096]

>>11537971
pentti linkola

[Anonymous No.11538097]

>>11537971
Gottfried Feder

[Anonymous No.11538143]

>>11537287
A post devoid of love.

[Anonymous No.11538147]

>>11537287
Damn it's you again. You always make posts like this.

[Anonymous No.11538156]

>>11538086
>if the sjw´s
If the sjw's what?

[Anonymous No.11538222]

>>11538156

[Anonymous No.11538324]

>>11538156

[Anonymous No.11538357]

>>11538222
>>11538324
An apostrophe and letter S after a noun entails the noun's possession of something. This is a literature board.

[Anonymous No.11538376]

>>11538357

[Anonymous No.11538401]

>>11538376
You probably say 80's instead of 80s. LMAO!

[Anonymous No.11538410]

>>11538401

[Anonymous No.11538470]

>>11537072
Emerging trends in my view;

-New Marxism. People like Peterson and Shapiro are pointing out genuine absurdities within the academic social justice edifice and people are realizing that. The Identity Politics driven left is now fighting a war on two fronts, where one side is peeling off people into reaction, and the other is bringing people into a more conventional marxism. Academically speaking there has also been a revival of marxism in the last couple years, against the dominate currents of gender and ethnic studies type work. 'Postcolonial Theory and the Spectre of Capital' is one example of a major critique against the postcolonial framework. Speaking subjectively all the activists I know are now reading work in 'Social Reproduction Theory', a marx influenced school of feminism centering on an economic definition of the role of women and the critique there-of. I see more and more people throwing around Allen's Invention of the White Race, Igntiff's How the Irish Became White, and Wages of Whiteness within anti-racist circles, rather than the liberal anti-racist garbage. So basically, a Marxism which has the theoretical resources to deal with gender, race, and the settler-colonial condition is on the rise, and rapidly displacing the idiotic versions of those things which people like Peterson are crushing from the other side.


-Authoritarian Technocratic Neo-Feudalism. This is the logical end place of current libertarian trends. There is a significant swell of anti-democratic sentiment in the wake of Trump, both from pro and anti Trump factions. Jason Brenner's book Against Democracy is one of the most talked about books in political philosophy today. He points out the extremely basic fact that the majority of Americans know nothing or next to nothing about the government or on-going politics. A huge percent can't name the vice president at any given time. His conception of politicians and government is basically in terms of management, and so he argues that there is no reason to expect that Democracy as it exists today is the best method of choosing competent managers. I think that as long as China continues to rise you are going to start to see more people, especially on the right, argue for their model as being superior. The meaning of "people's democracy" in those countries is not that the mass of society actually exert choice in their governance, but rather that the ruling party claims to be ruling 'in the interest of' the whole of the people. The contradictions of capitalism are only going to tighten and at some point having the risk that the people will vote in a government which could threaten the ruling interests is going to be too great, and democracy will be abolished.


Those are going to be the only two schools of political philosophy in 20 years.

[Anonymous No.11538517]

>>11537673
Your diary?

[Anonymous No.11538611]

>>11538470
>>11537950
>>11537287
shut the fuck up, this isn't frogtwitter you pseud larpers

[Anonymous No.11538651]

>>11537622
I see integralism especially fervent in Southern and Eastern Europe. What do you think?

[Anonymous No.11538841]

>>11537072
When we develop it.

[Anonymous No.11539500]

>>11538651
Care to elaborate?

[Anonymous No.11539694]

>>11537072
Esoteric Zizekian Accelerationism is the way to go.

[Anonymous No.11539712]

>>11537880
>prize-winning LGBTQ novelist
Affirmative action is not a real prize nor an accomplishment.

[Anonymous No.11539756]

>>11537294
Never going to happen in democratic states. Especially now that we live in the middle of the feminist revolution. All three of those things will be labeled as sexist. Between it's ties to the Catholic church and the prevalence of relativist morality there is no way any of those things will go beyond a niche following.

When I say feminist revolution I don't mean that somehow women are unifying together and winning anything. Just that there is a large enough number of thirsty dudes willing to listen and enact their beliefs.

[Anonymous No.11540278]

>>11538086
Neoreactionary thought is a highly contagious memeplex, progressivism is now doomed

[Anonymous No.11540328]

>>11537072
The Renaissance of Platonism will occur pretty soon.

[Anonymous No.11540346]

>>11537287
nigger you stole my entire life plan. FUCK YOU ITS MINE I WILL DO IT NOT YOU

[Anonymous No.11540349]

>>11537305
glad speculative realism died with a whimper

[Anonymous No.11540358]

>>11537287
>>11540346
Oh shit sorry just read the first two sentences, yeah what you said is bullshit. Thought for a second you were talking about my plan to integrate qualia into the scientific method through some sort of lingustic/mathematical construct.

[Anonymous No.11540359]

>>11537305
Literally, who?

[Anonymous No.11540364]

>>11540328

Buddy it’s been here since 1988

[Anonymous No.11540366]

>>11539756
I see it happening in southern and eastern european countries.

[Anonymous No.11540377]

I have

[Anonymous No.11540384]

>>11537305
Who are these virgins?

[Anonymous No.11540387]

>>11537889
Look up Philip Geff, he’s making panpsychism work, making serious inroads into the combination problem.

>>11537950
By the 22nd century we are all gonna be living in NeoChina.

>>11537896
This makes a bit of sense. The axises of future politics is gonna be the same social progressive to reactionary, but intersecting this will be one going from tech utopia to green nature politics.

Already you see the most thinky edge of the left splitting into the L/Acc on one side and degrowth on the other. People talking about political ecology rather than political economy, against people talking about AI and blockchain in automated decentralized economic planning.

[Anonymous No.11540388]

woops
I have $5 on the New Sincerity

[Anonymous No.11540391]

>>11537643
>NO. THE MIND IS A 'SOUL', BECAUSE IT CAN'T BE MERE MATTER, BECAUSE ALL MATTER OUTSIDE OF THE MIND IS DOUBTABLE, RIGHT? THIS IS WHY HE CAME UP WITH A 'SOUL' - SOMETHING ABOVE THE MATERIAL.
This feels non sequitor

[Anonymous No.11540507]

>>11537794
Stop.

[Anonymous No.11540817]

>>11540507
No. You.

[Anonymous No.11540925]

>>11537287

[Anonymous No.11540945]

>>11540391
The mind can supervene on the material, but if it is mere material, then it is ultimately doubtable.

Dualism believes in a relationship between the immaterial and the material - the mostly immaterial mind and the material body.

[Anonymous No.11540963]

>>11537287
BASED

[Anonymous No.11540986]

right here

[Anonymous No.11540988]

>>11537657
>>11537643
enough with the caps lock bud

[Anonymous No.11540990]

>>11540986
Care to extrapolate?

[Anonymous No.11540999]

Metamodernism but only if it manages to find tension against something else.

[Anonymous No.11541017]

Catholicism

[Anonymous No.11541046]

>>11540999
Against postmodernism?

[Anonymous No.11541139]

>>11537072
>Does not know about Circumstantialism nor Neo-Circumstantialism.

>>11540999
This, but unironically also.

>>11541046
There lacks tension in a sack of deconstructed shit; an utterly unworthy opponent.

[Anonymous No.11541172]

>>11537072
Soon

[Anonymous No.11541195]

>>11540387
it's Philip Goff

>>11537889
well if we wanted to be pedantic (I do) then panpsychism is idealism unless by idealism we only mean anti-realist idealism ("there's no concrete reality external to how things appear — Berkeley's 'esse est percipi'") and not just "thesis that the universe is fundamentally mental, or perhaps that all concrete facts are grounded in mental facts"

Chalmers introduces the following set of distinctions for modern idealism:
anti-realist vs realist idealism
> all is appearance vs there's mental nature external to appearances
> subject-involving vs non-subject-involving idealism
the fundamental mental states had by a subject vs by some other sort of entity or no entity at all
> micro-idealism, macro-idealism, and cosmic idealism
concrete reality grounded in fundamental entities vs macroscopic entities vs cosmos as a whole or a single cosmic entity

micropsychism is then be entailed by realist micro-idealism, and cosmopsychism by realist cosmic idealism

https://philpapers.org/archive/CHAIAT-11.pdf

>>11540388
I think it's too late for that one

[Anonymous No.11541275]

>>11537813

Then who cares what comes next? Philosophy peaked long ago in its capability of theorizing human behavior and evoking purpose and meaning. Anything else to come along will be either be a mutation of prior schools or bat-shit crazy cults with some intuited revelations at the helm.

[Anonymous No.11541285]

>>11541195
Brainlet Russel, Chalmers, and then a bunch of literal whos on the right. Who are they though? I'm intrigued.

[Anonymous No.11541323]

>>11541285
Morch, Goff, and Strawson Jr.

[Anonymous No.11541366]

islamo-socialism

[Anonymous No.11541449]

>>11541195
Thank you for that, I didn't know that paper existed. Good to see Kastrup cited as an example of "cosmic idealism". You may be right. And I agree with Chalmers that cosmic idealism is the most plausible.

[Anonymous No.11541453]

>>11541449
Promising, not plausible*

[Anonymous No.11541461]

>>11538470
>I see more and more people throwing around Allen's Invention of the White Race, Igntiff's How the Irish Became White, and Wages of Whiteness within anti-racist circles, rather than the liberal anti-racist garbage

>Invention of the White Race
>rather than the liberal anti racist garbage

????

[Anonymous No.11541464]

or how about intersectional capitalism

[Anonymous No.11541504]

>>11538470
Interesting. Prediction: the left will win the economic argument, the right will win the (anti) democratic argument.

[Anonymous No.11541525]

>>11540366
Proof?

[Anonymous No.11541551]

>>11541504
Wilkommen zu China

[Anonymous No.11541671]

>>11537072
Call me a /pol/lack pseud, but I really think it’ll be some kind of green-fascist Luddite-of-convenience, metamodern affair, complete with a multi-polar world philosophy. I agree with the Zizek type of communism as an inevitability, but I think it’s material exclusively and that human beings are not fully material entities, no matter how hard we try to push that we are. If you want proof that this is a likely burgeoning philosophy, then I just have to point to what people are being attracted to right now, on the fringe of acceptable discourse. Even if you don’t like it, things are heading more in this direction, and there are good reasons for it.

All that said, because of internet culture, there may not be a ‘next big school of philosophy.’

[Anonymous No.11541837]

>>11537657
>"I ALONE AM CORPOREAL," SAYS MAX STIRNER.
>I HAVE LONG AGO SYNTHESISED EGOISM WITH SOLIPSISM. I TAKE DESCARTES' COGITO FOR MYSELF, BECAUSE I AM THE CENTRE OF THIS WORLD. I NOW MAKE NO DISTINCTION BETWEEN MATTER OR NON-MATTER, BECOMING, IRONICALLY, A PHYSICALIST OR REDUCTIONIST.
>ALL SUPERVENE ON THE PRINCIPLES OF 'ME'.

[Anonymous No.11541839]

>>11538611
>People theorise that current popular philosophical trends are indicative of burgeoning schools which will become the next ‘big thing’
>YOU’RE LARPING

[Anonymous No.11541876]

>>11541839
popular on twitter, you mean
>>11537072
you guys have a completely retarded and manichean view of the history of philosophy

[Anonymous No.11541914]

>>11541876
>popular on twitter, you mean
If you never leave your room and only keep a small circle of friends, I can see why you might think that.

[Anonymous No.11541926]

>>11541914
Yeah I don't frequent the real important people in the real important circles, such as Kantbot and Logodedalus, I'm afraid.

[Anonymous No.11541951]

>>11541926
Dude, I don't have a twitter.

[Anonymous No.11541991]

The intellectual dark web is already a thing.

[Anonymous No.11542108]

>>11538143

I'm very disappointed in all the faggots in this thread who made vacant posts such as this one, against the fp.

[Anonymous No.11542138]

>>11537305

receding hairline convention

[Anonymous No.11542594]

>>11537305
Still want to know who these no names are.

[Anonymous No.11542646]

>>11542594
Ian Hamilton Grant
Graham Harman
Quentin Meillassoux
Ray Brassier

[Anonymous No.11542703]

>>11542646
Thanks, I only know about Brassier thanks to Land, but even then I'm only used to seeing the name.

[Anonymous No.11542744]

>>11537305
object oriented is such a wannabe piss movement, I wish I could create a Lewis Carroll Alice in Wonderland cookie that instantly blasts you with the full mature knowledge of how shallow and derivative OOO is, so everybody could eat that cookie and laugh in one big circle at these poseur fucks

It's just so bad, it's like when people post
>I want to get into Deleuze but I don't know what to do. Should I read Bergson and Leibniz???
because they googled Deleuze and their brain could only sift three pieces of information: "something to do with bergson, something to do with leibniz, prestigious weird crazy argyle sweater philosopher man I will be smart if I understand him"

And then someone replied to that thread with an air of expertise, someone who had tortured themselves for the past three years to understand the bootleg cultist version of Deleuze popular on internet forums full of idiots, by walking backwards uphill through the blog ramblings of failed graduate students and watching Youtube videos full of grasping gesticulating men who wear turtlenecks under blazers with sneakers into their 40s,
>Yeah what you gotta do is you gotta read Leibniz like THIIIIIIIIIS and then you have to read Bergson like THIIIIIIIIIIIS and then repeat all this jargon I'm saying and you'll be a cool guy like me

And then someone enters the thread who actually understands the history of philosophy and can effortlessly see through Deleuze's whole ontology and understand Badiou's perfectly correct critique of it as a depthless surface, a "plane of immanence" that makes no conceptual innovations on much smarter and less pretentious guys like Merleau-Ponty or even Derrida, and that person tries to say
>No! Stop! Not only is Deleuze kinda bad, this dude who is telling you how to read Deleuze is a total retard and doesn't know anything! What you should actually do is learn to read philosophy properly and then you'll see how being a "Deleuze guy" is like going around saying "Heh I'm a big cinema buff... In fact you could say I'm an ELITE FILM FAN.. I've seen every one of the Coen Brothers movies!", it's not even on the spectrum of actual philosophy, it's more like being a malformed goblin simulacrum who apes the rituals of the real thing
but nobody listens to him and a dozen people in that thread waste five years of their lives worshiping at the altar of Blog-Harmonized Pseudo-Interpretation of Pseudo-Deleuze, Pretty Lousy Phenomenologist to Begin With

Swap OOO for Deleuze

[Anonymous No.11542790]

>>11542744
your post is retarded

[Anonymous No.11542793]

>>11542790
I bet harman knows a lot about that topic

[Anonymous No.11542794]

Actual Marxism is going to make a come back and the post-modernists will be exposed for the lying revisionist armchair liberals they are.

[Anonymous No.11542847]

>>11537072
It's already emerging

[Anonymous No.11542874]

>>11537287
So, Nick Land.

[Anonymous No.11542879]

>>11537794
Nice bait.

[Anonymous No.11542897]

>>11538470
So Idiocracy?

[Anonymous No.11542940]

>>11542847
based scumgang poster

[Anonymous No.11542955]

>>11542940
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3k2c0d1iwQY

[Anonymous No.11542988]

>>11537287
So, instead of complaining, why not propose how to make all the cool shit you mentioned actually work?

[Anonymous No.11543011]

>>11542847
rased and bedpilled

[Anonymous No.11543166]

>>11542794
I agree with this even though I think actual Marxism is fucking stupid too. At least Marxists got off their arses and made cheap housing.

[Anonymous No.11543427]

>>11537643
Can't I just doubt that I think?
>but then you'd still be thinking!
So? I could just regress into an infinity of recursive doubts. Or maybe thought is real but there is no "I"; just like the senses mediate our reality, thought is mediated by this "I". Or maybe vice versa. Or maybe thought is some temporal quirk. I never experience anything immediately: I never think immediately. Thought is like the air blowing in and out of the space left by an object in continuous motion. It moves about what is actually animated.

[Anonymous No.11543498]

>>11537072
This man, in my country he is everything.

[Anonymous No.11543595]

>>11543498
Who is he?

[Anonymous No.11543597]

>>11541366
>mfw houellebecq was right all along
I know it was ironical, but his portrayal in Submission made the whole thing sound pretty conmfy

[Anonymous No.11544142]

Bump

[Anonymous No.11544343]

>>11537072
The conflicts of the 19th and 20th centuries never really resolved themselves. Now, after a brief period of the "end of history", history is moving again. No new philosophy will emerge, because the conflicts that define the future are basically the same ones that defined the past, but with lower socioeconomic stakes (in the short term) due to raised standards of living, but infinitely higher general stakes due to impending ecological apocalypse.

[Anonymous No.11544348]

>>11542955
based

[Anonymous No.11544356]

>>11542955
Cringe and bluepilled.

[Anonymous No.11544375]

>>11537072
A return to neglected right-wing thinkers of the 19th and 20th centuries. It's already happening, but the realization that a small group of fringe paleocons and sociologists somehow managed to nail down the exact social, political, and economic dynamics that would trigger a revolt against the West's managerial elite and a turn away from liberalism is nothing short of astounding and still, even after 2016, has not received the attention it deserves. The story of the early 21st century is the story of an ossified urban elite stumbling into a civilizational war with Islam while forgetting to feed the children lounging around their ivory towers and ending up paying the predictable price.

[Anonymous No.11544386]

>>11543595
Everything.

[Anonymous No.11544560]

>>11539712
Based and redpilled

[Anonymous No.11544578]

>>11544375
Can I get a list of these thinkers, paleocons and sociologists alike, please?

[Anonymous No.11544719]

>>11537072
people finally see that cultural marxism is cancer

[Anonymous No.11544730]

>>11544578
Paul Gottfried
Sam Francis
James Burnham
Donald Warren

[Anonymous No.11544747]

>>11544719
>cultural marxism

Doesn't exist.

[Anonymous No.11544755]

>>11544747
:O

[Anonymous No.11544758]

>>11544755

-{[[]: ^ °

[Anonymous No.11544801]

My guess goes towards the rising tendencies of Sugma, Ligma, Bofa and So-Can by the Sugandese.

[Anonymous No.11544822]

>>11537305
rich evans is a philosopher?

[Anonymous No.11544840]

Metafiction as guide to reality, a resurgence in Bernays-style propaganda, but metaphysicalized, with a flavor of speculative-fiction-made-real (think Borges). Fantasies of an omnipotent elite reshaping reality according to its whims, and the embracing of fake news, outright and invented historical events. Past fictions become a guide to future actualities – holograms of fucking Johnny Bravo wandering the streets alongside those of Odysseus making his voyage over and over again in the Aegean (tickets will be sold to this). Realism recast as vaguely reactionary at first, then outright fascist.

[Anonymous No.11544843]

>>11544801
What is rising tendencies?

[Anonymous No.11544845]

>>11544843
RISING TENDENCIES OF THESE NUTS AHAHHAA

[Anonymous No.11544848]

>>11544801
what's guess?

[Anonymous No.11544878]

>>11542594
>Ray Brassier
>>11542646
>>11542703
>>11542744
>tfw I'm reading Brassier's wiki article right now and it's all gibberish

[Anonymous No.11544883]

I think when biological immortality becomes possible and the first humans reach 200 years old. That's at least the next big philosophical school, everything until then won't be able to compare.

[Anonymous No.11544892]

Never because schools of thought are spooks

[Anonymous No.11544904]

>>11537072
When I get published.
>>11537287
Oh my gosh, look at this pasta, holy shit.

[Anonymous No.11545127]

>>11544848
GUESS DEEZE GOOCH BIH HOHOHOHO

[Anonymous No.11545138]

>>11544845
>>11545127
Thank you for your service.

[Anonymous No.11545275]

>>11544840
I really hope you're wrong because that would be fucking awful to live through.

[Anonymous No.11545314]

>>11537072
>When will the next big school of philosophy emerge?

When the materialist socio-economic system of the western world will collapse (again), but only this time the collapse will affect most countries tied to the global economy, and as such, a philosophy will emerge that negates materialism but at the same time also go back to plain and simple materialistic means like living in a farm, with emphasis on individuality and protection of nature, basically eco-anarchism

[Anonymous No.11545345]

>>11545314
>protect muh Mother Nature!!
Deluded hippie ass, we’re not going back to being peasants

[Anonymous No.11545376]

>>11545345

Not until the political economy shits up the entire eco system and there won't be any nature left, only within that extreme will people realize how important nature really is in relation to their individuality

Peasant is a harsh word. It'll probably exist under a new contemporary notion centered around nature, trade, the Individual, and loosely associated communes of free people

[Anonymous No.11545386]

>>11545376
>loosely associated communes of free people
this only works as long as no warlords/organized militaries come along
see Makhno

[Anonymous No.11545716]

>>11537287
>In a few years STEM/scientism will undergo a big critique that picks up steam and becomes trendy, and out of that critique a kind of vague will emerge a neo-naturalism that vaguely incorporates "reenchantment" themes and some kind of panpsychism

This is already a thing though?

[Anonymous No.11545726]

>>11545386

And that only works as long as there is theoretically no scarcity of resources, which of course there will be

The future will mostly depend on how civilized the west will be in regards to resources allocation. On one hand there's the vision of a Venus Project utopia, on the other, hierarchy, neo-feudalist warlords and a constant fear for tomorrow