[ 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: 96 KB, 511x804, 1452930373487.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14095608 No.14095608 [Reply] [Original]

Essentially, if you had to live with or had to interact with a philosopher that "rubbed" you the wrong way, which one would it be? Why would they "rub" you the wrong way? What is the conflict that would bother you the most or a perspective that is the most annoying to you?

>> No.14095623

Kant or Hegel by far. Augustine and Aquinas would be annoying, but I like both of their work. Rousseau would be a laugh. Montaigne would be the wisest. Plato/Socrates would be either pedantic or based. Nietzsche apparently hardly ever spoke. Marx didn't speak much either. I'm autistic and find it ever increasingly hard to talk to people that are normies, so IDK who I would want to talk to the most.

>> No.14095651

Kierkegaard. He's a melodramatic midwit who thinks he understands Hegel (hah!) & has a massively overinflated opinion of his own intelligence in general. A Byron without the charisma and half the talent.

His specific personality type grates against me so badly that if I were forced to live with him I would give in to my most psychopathic impulses and go out of my way to break him.

>> No.14095656

>>14095608
I feel like the most annoying one would definitely be Carnap.

>> No.14095681

>>14095623
I feel like most philosophers were fucking annoying to deal with. Plato seems to be pretty direct in calling people slow witted, but he seems to be nice about it (I feel like he doesnt judge you or hate you for that- he is just autistically honest). The german idealists were such abrasive turbo incels, I would avoid them like the plague. Camus and sartre would be such whiny cunts. I honestly believe foucault or other more contemporary thinkers would be the least cuntish. In our times we moved on from that overly aristocratic world view- so the younger the philosopher the less of an asshole he would be

>> No.14095714

>>14095651
the incel kierkegaard, the chad byron

>> No.14095717

Aristotle in his younger years was apparently incredibly autistic

>> No.14095736

Socrates or Schopenhauer

>> No.14095845

Sophists

>> No.14095957

>>14095717
Source

>> No.14095959

Lao zi

>> No.14096072
File: 497 KB, 699x1067, 1442772692317.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14096072

>>14095623
Could you elaborate on what you dislike about Kant or disagree with? I'm just curious and would like to see it from your perspective.

>> No.14096133

I have to say from personal experience that socratic dialogue is frustating and infuriating. I mean it with love.

I'd definitely have to agree with >>14095651

>> No.14096240

Taleb

>> No.14096261
File: 124 KB, 900x750, Jacques-Derrida.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14096261

>> No.14096318

I want to like Descartes but everything about his life, style and intellectual controversies suggest he was abnormally prickly and autistic.

Epicurus was the first redditor – a miracle for the third century B.C. but not someone I would find it pleasant to talk to.

>>14095623
Hegel was in fact known to be extremely pleasant in company. His students were extraordinarily loyal because of their personal friendships with him, which was how he eventually started to win influence (students in important positions shilling his books).

>> No.14096799

>>14096318
>Epicurus was the first redditor – a miracle for the third century B.C. but not someone I would find it pleasant to talk to.
Lmao why do you think he was the first redditor?

>> No.14097113

>>14095608
As much as I like Nietzsche, it would probably be him.

>> No.14097153

>>14095608
Probably Nietzsche

>> No.14097189

>>14095608
Nietzsche, although my friends insist that all the dumb shit is his sister's fault

>> No.14097196

>>14095717
I wonder why the guy known for schematizing everything was autistic!

>> No.14097834

>>14095651
Nah Kiekegaard is based and actually interesting to read. He can also fucking write decently. Hegel is that kid in class who gets a D on his final paper for being incoherent and brags about how "good" his ideas are. Ideas mean nothing if you can't communicate them well.

>> No.14097917

Nick Land. Pompous buffoonery. Drug fried mind. Chinese masters. Muh acceleration-ism. It would be like Alice in wonderland, except on research chemicals, xanax, and codeine cough syrup.

>> No.14097918

>>14095608
So we are saying like this, so called, interaction, or whatever, with, hmm, with the philosopher, would take the form maybe of a dinner or maybe something more informal, I don't know. But you know, if we are speaking of dinner then, tangentially you know, it recalls to me a meal with a farmer, uhhm, farmer from, back in Yugoslavia, that I once had.

>> No.14097984

Probably Kant. I like his writings, but he must have been incredibly boring and overly conscientious.

>> No.14097994

>>14095623
Ironically, Kant and Hegel were well enjoyed by people. That's why Schopenhauer hated Hegel so much - they were colleagues, and everyone liked Hegel more.

>> No.14098198

>>14096072
every little household disagreement would be a circular debate filled with complex flowery language that requires extreme background knowledge and understanding when you tell the fag its his turn to do the dishes