[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / g / ic / jp / lit / sci / tg / vr ] [ index / top / reports / report a bug ] [ 4plebs / archived.moe / rbt ]

Support us on Patreon!

/lit/ - Literature

View post   

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
File: 571 KB, 900x750, 1527491086147.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
12919222 No.12919222 [Reply] [Original]


>> No.12919435

big agree

>> No.12919446
File: 41 KB, 290x290, 1511272514725.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

dude hinduism lmao

>> No.12919461
File: 128 KB, 202x320, theart.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Arthur 'Sloppy Schoppy' Schopenhauer was a pathetic bitch who dedicated his life to impotently seething at Hegel's numerous philsophic and sexual conquests, pigdog untermensch, utterly disgusting.

>> No.12919512
File: 157 KB, 599x723, 1554897238596.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

What about the final boss of German Idealism?

>> No.12919523
File: 29 KB, 624x351, %%%%%%.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Where should I start with mr sad sideburns?

>> No.12919528

The World as Will and Idea

>> No.12919542
File: 17 KB, 265x400, 9780198237228_l.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Read pic related, then read all his works in chronological order.

>> No.12919544

german idealists r big gay

>> No.12919998

i disagree

>> No.12920050

why ?

>> No.12920086

more you KANT agree

>> No.12920384
File: 51 KB, 800x450, facts.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Schopenhauer was realest nigger of all time

>> No.12920436

Has anyone here actually read both philosophers? If so, please share your thoughts on both of them

>> No.12920472

What specifically do you want to know?

>> No.12920562

which one is worth reading and which one is full of shit like hegel

>> No.12920588

Arthur. How are you still this bitter? It's been over two hundred years.

>> No.12920625

Kant is still relevant, while nobody cares about the bitter loser Schopenhauer. Only brianlets like him for his writing style, because they can't into Kant.

>> No.12920627

Schop wouldn't even exist without Kantdaddy to rip off

>> No.12920638

I would never have bothered reading Schopenhauer if I hadn't enjoyed the first Critique so much. You aren't, by chance, a Hegelian, are you?

>> No.12920643

Just read the Oxford Very Short Introduction to both and then decide if you want to try them. If you want to understand modern phil you must have an understanding of Kant though.

>> No.12920680

Both are worth reading. There is no contradiction between the two.

>> No.12920725

who is he?

>> No.12920745

True, but never say it to Schopenhauer or he'll push you down a staircase.

>> No.12920756

If you're an Internet mad boy, sure. If you're a philosophy professor, big no.

>> No.12920795

Obit OPus, abit onus.

>> No.12920833

Not really, I don't commit to philosophers to the degree that I would call myself a Hegelian or any other kind of -ian, not saying I look down on those who do, I just can't find any good reason for it.
While my post was polemical, it's hard to deny the importance Kant has among philosophers, Schopenhauer doesn't get anywhere near his resonance. I think Nietzsche is a better, life-affirming version of him anyway.

>> No.12920846

>writes an entire book to justify that being nice is nice

>> No.12920860

The man's fealty to and ability to accrue to his own system were quite possibly at the level of Aristotle. The likes of Kant and Spinoza (for instance, and solely in reference to their ability to avoid damaging self contradiction) don't even come close. He doesn't have the "resonance" of Kant because he is ignored for having "problematic" opinions. Nietzsche is a negative sign in front of Schopenhauer: all self-contradiction, a labyrinth that ends where it began, a jester. Not that he's the worse for it, but to say he's Schopenhauer v2.0 is just misleading, despite the philosophical debt owed.

>> No.12920937

>all self-contradiction, a labyrinth that ends where it began, a jester
He wasn't trying to create a system, so it's not quite fair to fault him for this. Some like Foucault have taken example from his method and it has its advantages to overthrow yourself once a point of exhaustion has been reached.
He has a quote where he's saying that systems are disingenuous. Once you start building a system, you find yourself caught up in it, deeply committed and vulnerable to confirmation bias. I think that for Nietzsche, it was important to grow as a philosopher, moving with the course of life and being able to re-adapt.
A systemic view is like that of a bird's eye, in applying such a lens to Nietzsche, you find many contradictions and inconsistencies. But he was self-aware about not trying to harmonize it across time and there are still some consistent themes you can follow like a thread throughout his work.

>> No.12921044

I agree with all of that. That's why I said, "he's not the worse for it." Also why I said he was like Schopenhauer with a negative sign.

>> No.12921760

found the feminist cuck

>> No.12921786
File: 98 KB, 480x400, funny-hijab-meme.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Schopenhauer says at the outset that his work is no more than a continuation of Kant's....

OP, have you actually read either?

>> No.12921799

Nevertheless he vaults a ton of critique against Kant. Gone are the times when people knew how to respect others without blind worship.

>> No.12921879

He critiques Kant but he says again and again he does so as a disciple, not an adversary. He sees it more as correcting errors and fallacies in reasoning while refining what is soumd.

>> No.12921891

>liking Hegel more than Schopenhauer

sup CIA?

>> No.12922028
File: 44 KB, 500x322, aaaaaaaaaaafdrgfgfg.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>Schelling's Parmenedian phase

>> No.12922345


>> No.12922360

Schoppy says as it is, he has that german honesty.
Also name one thing hes wrong about women

>> No.12922363

Kant wasn't nice for the sake of being nice. You got him wrong.

>> No.12922375

Hegel had no conquests, what the fuck are you on about? He married an ugly trollop and sat down to scribble his tripe.

Schopenhauer meanwhile lived a life if leisure and freely consorted with women from all walks of life

>> No.12922381

Kant's Critique of Pure Reason would be incomprehensible without Schopenhauer's criticism

>> No.12922392

Is Schopenhauer the only philosopher who could've made it as a novelist? His writing style is incredibly clear and fluid, the opposite of a typical full autismo treatise found in other thinkers.

>> No.12922436

Distilled autism.

>> No.12922467

That wolverine looking motherfucker never got laid, lel wtf are you talking about?

>> No.12922477

have you ever read anything about his life?
he got laid on multiple occasions you idiot

>> No.12922483

Prove it.

>> No.12922510

Without trying to shill, I think he didn't get so much (philosophical) resonance because he simply finished that path of thinking. There is nothing much to critizise about his reasoning and all the consequences have already been laid out by himself.
He did influence many important figures of history but for philosophy to progress completely new approaches were chosen.

>> No.12922591

wait, thats illegal

>> No.12922662

This thread was moved to >>>/his/6446029

Name (leave empty)
Comment (leave empty)
Password [?]Password used for file deletion.