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

Schopenhauer>Kant

>> No.12919435

big agree

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

dude hinduism lmao

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

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]
12919512

What about the final boss of German Idealism?

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

Where should I start with mr sad sideburns?

>> No.12919528

>>12919523
The World as Will and Idea

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

>>12919523
Read pic related, then read all his works in chronological order.

>> No.12919544

>>12919512
german idealists r big gay

>> No.12919998

>>12919222
i disagree

>> No.12920050

>>12919222
why ?

>> No.12920086

>>12919998
more you KANT agree

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

>>12919222
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

>>12920436
What specifically do you want to know?

>> No.12920562

>>12920472
which one is worth reading and which one is full of shit like hegel

>> No.12920588

>>12920562
Arthur. How are you still this bitter? It's been over two hundred years.

>> No.12920625

>>12919222
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

>>12919222
Schop wouldn't even exist without Kantdaddy to rip off

>> No.12920638

>>12920625
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

>>12920562
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

>>12920562
Both are worth reading. There is no contradiction between the two.

>> No.12920725

>>12919512
who is he?

>> No.12920745

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

>> No.12920756

>>12919222
If you're an Internet mad boy, sure. If you're a philosophy professor, big no.

>> No.12920795

>>12920745
Obit OPus, abit onus.

>> No.12920833

>>12920638
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

>Kant
>writes an entire book to justify that being nice is nice
>Schoppe
>FUCK WOMEN FUCK HEGEL FUCK JEWS

>> No.12920860

>>12920833
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

>>12920860
>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

>>12920937
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

>>12919461
found the feminist cuck

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

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

>>12921786
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

>>12921799
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]
12922028

>>12919512
>Schelling's Parmenedian phase

>> No.12922345

>>12920725
Schelling

>> No.12922360

>>12920846
Schoppy says as it is, he has that german honesty.
Also name one thing hes wrong about women

>> No.12922363

>>12920846
Kant wasn't nice for the sake of being nice. You got him wrong.

>> No.12922375

>>12919461
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

>>12920833
>>12920860
>>12920937
Distilled autism.

>> No.12922467

>>12922375
That wolverine looking motherfucker never got laid, lel wtf are you talking about?

>> No.12922477

>>12922467
have you ever read anything about his life?
he got laid on multiple occasions you idiot

>> No.12922483

>>12922477
Prove it.

>> No.12922510

>>12920833
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

>>12919222
wait, thats illegal

>> No.12922662

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