[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature


View post   

File: 4 KB, 142x186, kant.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12044224 No.12044224 [Reply] [Original]

We know good philosophers who write poorly (Hegel, Kant), who are good writers but poor philosophers?

>> No.12044248

>>12044224
>good philosopher
>Hegel
Pick one.

>> No.12044264
File: 116 KB, 1666x1000, MV5BOTBmNzQ4MGMtNGNjNy00MjRjLWIxYTQtYjMzNTYwYmFiODVlL2ltYWdlL2ltYWdlXkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyMTc4MzI2NQ@@._V1_SY1000_CR0,0,1666,1000_AL_.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12044264

>>12044224
>good writers but poor philosophers?
Bertrand Russell

>> No.12044291

Kant was better organized writer than Hegel but he couldn't word his ideas very well.

>> No.12044308

Nietzsche, Plato

>> No.12044315

>>12044308
Nietzche, Cioran

>> No.12044316

Camus

>> No.12044430

Hitchens

>> No.12044497

>>12044224
Baudrillard.

>> No.12044528
File: 224 KB, 1200x800, ob_12421f_arthur-schopenhauer.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12044528

This brainlet right here

>> No.12044535

>>12044528
Was just about to post this.

>> No.12044540

>>12044264
Yup.
And Nietzsche.

>> No.12044626

>>12044224
Sartre imo

>> No.12044681

>>12044224
Most existentialists.

>> No.12044743

>>12044528
>>12044535
explain yourselves.

>> No.12044748

>>12044224
Camus is a decent philosopher but a much better novelist.

>> No.12044764

>>12044681
Fits the ideology, desu.
The experience of existing is the only thing that matters as the world has no inherent meaning, so the meaning of the text matters less than the experience of reading it.

>> No.12044772

>>12044748
>>12044626
Camus vs Sartre - which was the better novelist? Better philosopher?

>> No.12044778

>>12044772
Camus was a chad
Sartre was a spastic

>> No.12044788

>>12044681
Would you say Kierekgaard?

I find his arguments interesting to relate to emotionally, and agree with them, but they don't feel productive.

>> No.12044916

>>12044224
Hegel was a poor philosopher who wrote poorly
>>12044315
>>12044528
>>12044497
wrong

>> No.12044932

>>12044788
Kierkegaard is like a Buddhist monk who teaches his students by exposing them to paradoxes rather than explaining things. He will explain the full extent of how complicated certain paradoxes are, but he won't get to a concluding solution to them. He will show you to the right path, but it is up to the individual to discover the answer themselves.

>> No.12045397

>>12044224
>hegel
>poor writer

More like:

>you
>mong reader

>> No.12046355

>>12044788
Kierkegaard in large anticipated Nietzche, who in large anticipated modernity in its full horror!glory. I don't know what you mean by that his works aren't productive, I personally find him one of the most applicable philosophers. Besides, he BTFO'd Hegel so hard that he's still feeling it

>> No.12046379

>>12044224
Kierkegaard

>> No.12046385

>>12044743
I'm a woman and his incel philosophy just rubs me the wrong way.

>> No.12046390

>>12046385
but he wasnt an incel? He was basically a libertine which makes his pretentions about 'asceticism' all the more ridiculous

>> No.12046397

>>12046390
Fake news, you got yourself a #metoo mention on twitter, mister.

>> No.12046399

>>12046390
>falling for obvious bait

>> No.12046400

>>12046397
>#metoo
please i would kill her and her family

>> No.12046404

>>12046355
t. Icycalm

>> No.12046745

>>12044528
Calling Hegel a brainlet on some dumb botswanan rhinospotting forum while never having amounted to anything. His wrinting is a crime, sure, but the man wasn’t dumb.

>> No.12046752

>>12046745
>rhinospotting
i applaud the effort

>> No.12047233

>>12046355
Hmm truthfully I've only read a bit of Either, still working my way through it. I just found the beginning pessimistic and relatable. I guess it's productive in the way in understanding how nothing will ever be truly satisfying, essentially reiterating the grass is always greener.

>> No.12047242

>>12044308
>>12044315
>>12044540
ree

>> No.12047249

How do you distinguish good from bad philosophy?

Lack of application, vagueness, generality, ambiguity?

>> No.12047262

>>12044540
*tips*

>> No.12047372

pause for a minute and think if OP read kant and hegel in german and apply that to all of you who think someone writes poorly because you read translations

>> No.12047421

Annie Dillard
Ayn Rand

>> No.12048574

>>12044224
Socrates, Diogenes.

>> No.12048612

Foucault

>> No.12048637

>>12044528
>botswanan
"Mind over matter" is sheer stupidity and laziness, as if the one was an entirely separate thing from the other and could jump "over" it for fuck's sakes. Rather, it is mind THROUGH matter; i.e. the mind does not magically manifest itself in the world, but—quite aside from the fact that mind is already matter (it's called the brain), it uses matter, it commands it, to get its will done. Reminds me of Schopenhauer denying that knowledge is power because power didn't just jump into his lap while he was sitting in his couch of its own accord due to his sheer intelligence. Not intelligent enough to get OUT of his couch and his home and put his vaunted intelligence to use! Intelligence my ass if you can't even figure that! And then pretend to regale us with how jaded you've become of your intelligence! Well, as it happens, we too have become jaded of your intelligence, buddy.

>> No.12048817
File: 71 KB, 1280x865, 805512900_253039.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12048817

>>12044772
Camus was better than Sartre in every way possible

>> No.12048889

>>12048637
Based icycalm