/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.15169030]

He was right about everything. He is the end boss of philosophy, everybody else is just complimentary.

[Anonymous No.15169045]

>>15169030
>He is the end boss of philosophy
*blocks your path*

[Anonymous No.15169059]

>>15169030
Not if you die with work unfinished bro

[Anonymous No.15169091]

>>15169059
His work wasn't unfinished, he was just ready for the next level.

[Anonymous No.15169112]

>>15169030
*reads Origins of Species by Darwin*
holy shit, humans are not so special as I thought we are. still, we're not exactly animals, right? I mean we have societies with stable laws and customs
*reads German Ideology by Marx and Engels*
s-shit, it seems like social order is just a historical contingency. w-well, maybe at least there is some objective transhistorical morality independent of whatever the society deems correct?
*reads Nietzsche's On Genealogy of Morality*

this is basically where I am, how the fuck do I escape this hellish pit? is there any objective moral code to live by? I'm desperate for refutations of Nietzsche, I don't want to be a soulless amoralist

[Anonymous No.15169125]

>>15169030
>Plato was right about Everything. He is the end boss of philosophy, everybody else is just complimentary.

>Aristotle was right about Everything. He is the end boss of philosophy, everybody else is just complimentary.

>Descartes was right about Everything. He is the end boss of philosophy, everybody else is just complimentary.

>Aquinus was right about Everything. He is the end boss of philosophy, everybody else is just complimentary.

>Hobbes was right about Everything. He is the end boss of philosophy, everybody else is just complimentary.

>Berkeley was right about Everything. He is the end boss of philosophy, everybody else is just complimentary.

>Spinoza was right about Everything. He is the end boss of philosophy, everybody else is just complimentary.

>Hume was right about Everything. He is the end boss of philosophy, everybody else is just complimentary.

>Kant was right about Everything. He is the end boss of philosophy, everybody else is just complimentary.

> Hegel was right about Everything. He is the end boss of philosophy, everybody else is just complimentary.

>keirkagaard was right about Everything. He is the end boss of philosophy, everybody else is just complimentary.

>Schopenhauer was right about Everything. He is the end boss of philosophy, everybody else is just complimentary.

>Marx was right about Everything. He is the end boss of philosophy, everybody else is just complimentary.

>Stirner was right about Everything. He is the end boss of philosophy, everybody else is just complimentary.

>witgenstien was right about Everything. He is the end boss of philosophy, everybody else is just complimentary.

> Camus was right about Everything. He is the end boss of philosophy, everybody else is just complimentary.

People say all of this. What makes you different?

[Anonymous No.15169126]

>>15169112
Read Derrida, act with justice

[Anonymous No.15169128]

>>15169112
lmao then you completely misunderstood. let this liberate you.

[Anonymous No.15169136]

>>15169030
>>15169045
>post modernists
>right about everything

More like a dead end that can't lead anywhere

[Anonymous No.15169149]

>>15169112
Have you tried, dare I say it, reading the Greeks?

[Anonymous No.15169159]

>>15169045
Never ascended Nietzsche's work. His entire philosophy, if anything nietzschean, an exaggeration of Nietzsche's affirmation of being, life and experience itself. Sadly he clung to simplicity of a Christian and ascetic experience. Heidegger was the truest form of a reactionary.

[Anonymous No.15169172]

>>15169149
yes, Nietzsche refuted the post-Socratics

[Anonymous No.15169178]

>>15169172
>when Nietzsche would have agreed with scholastics.

[Anonymous No.15169181]

>>15169112
there has never been any ground for morality other than God and there never will be

[Anonymous No.15169185]

>>15169112
Beyond Good and Evil. At this point "What moral code should I be living by" is not what you need to be worrying about, that's just a question you're not equipped to answer. What you need to be worrying right now is "How do I even know my thoughts are my own and not just me copying other people" and "Is objective knowledge even attainable"

> I don't want to be a soulless amoralist
Why?
If Nietzsche was completely 100% right about everything what would you do then?

[Anonymous No.15169215]

>>15169030
Excuse me?

[Anonymous No.15169289]

>>15169185
>Why?
>If Nietzsche was completely 100% right about everything what would you do then?
because I want to have a fairly normal social life. I'm still young, younger than most people here probably. in my social circles politics is often a topic of discussion, imagine a debate concerning abortion between pro-choicers and pro-lifers. people exchange their views, trying to establish a common moral framework and how the fuck am I supposed to partake in this discussion? say that all morality was refuted by a syphilitic incel 150 years ago so they shouldn't bother with debating moral views? it seems to me that Nietzsche was too far ahead of his time, we live in a democratic society and participation in it requires some guiding moral principle to make informed decisions. unless I want to live with my head up my ass not listening to anyone's arguments at some point I have to be a part of exchange of moral views

[Anonymous No.15169306]

>>15169289
>unless I want to live with my head up my ass not listening to anyone's arguments
I live like this. Not particularly interesting.

[Anonymous No.15169355]

>>15169306
>Not particularly interesting.
well, then you can see what I meant. I understand now the love-hate relationship between Nietzsche and anarchists, it really seems like other systems which by necessity have to impose a common moral framework on the entire population either by force or ideology are inherently anti-Nietzschean

[Anonymous No.15169373]

>>15169289
> imagine a debate concerning abortion between pro-choicers and pro-lifers. people exchange their views, trying to establish a common moral framework and how the fuck am I supposed to partake in this discussion?
But you're an amoralist, why would you say anything but what you want to? And if you want to say nothing then why not do so?

And since when is the goal ever to establish a common moral framework? The goal of every moral argument ever is to make the other guy look like a retard.

[Anonymous No.15169447]

>>15169125
This is actually true about Wittgenstein

[Anonymous No.15169462]

>>15169355
I lied. This is the most interesting life an human can possibly experience.

[Anonymous No.15169698]

>>15169125
OP gave up there.

[Anonymous No.15169901]

>>15169355
>really seems like other systems which by necessity have to impose a common moral framework on the entire population either by force or ideology are inherently anti-Nietzschean

Damn you're dumb as fuck

[Anonymous No.15169913]

>>15169698
Gave up? Why would I give up? Answe4 me you stupid fucking cunt

[Anonymous No.15169952]

>complimentary

[Anonymous No.15169959]

>>15169030
he didn't postulate anything
just reee reees
cringe of cringes

[Anonymous No.15170630]

If you had posted Heidegger, I would’ve agreed. Leo Strauss thought he was the only real philosopher of his time and I think he’s been the only one since.

[Anonymous No.15170927]

>>15169030
Baby's first philosopher.

[Anonymous No.15171214]

>>15170927
that would be Plato

[Anonymous No.15171433]

>>15169030
But Plato already wrote about how Religion isnt as important as Family in Crito

[Anonymous No.15171878]

Look up the meanings of the two words "complimentary" and "complementary".

[Anonymous No.15172009]

Philosophers tend to over intellectualize their hindsight, as well as greener grass in other yards.

[Anonymous No.15172023]

>>15171433
religion is not important at all in plato if not as a civic tool.

[Anonymous No.15172043]

"end boss"

I don't know, for me Nietzsche is more of a tutorial.

[Anonymous No.15172055]

>>15169126
Yikes.
Do not read Derrida wtf

[Anonymous No.15172059]

>>15169172
Nietzsche was greatly influenced by Heraclitus, who was a pre-socratic.
Do you just mean he refuted Socrates?

[Anonymous No.15172152]

>>15169112

>we're not exactly animals, right? I mean we have societies with stable laws and customs

Consciousness is an aberration in evolution. We have the capacity for sublime/divine experience to help us cope with nihilism, but killed it with logic.

>how the fuck do I escape this hellish pit? is there any objective moral code to live by?

Read Zarathustra. Nietzsche has the answer.

[Anonymous No.15172961]

>>15169030
>You should read the greeks, the stoics and Kant before reading Nietzsche
Fuck you niggers, doing all this just so he can shit on your favourites.

[Anonymous No.15172972]

>>15169030
>He is the end boss of philosophy

Yup

[Anonymous No.15173001]

>>15169112
you are now ready for Cummiuse