/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.15382196]

This is really interesting.

[Anonymous No.15382285]

>>15382196

What does he even do in those things? Culture culture culture, Plato Plato Plato, modern weird culture? What are the big ideas?

[Anonymous No.15383675]

>>15382285
It is about the geometric importance of spheres.

[Anonymous No.15383703]

its very good, i love it

[Anonymous No.15383717]

>>15383703
Agreed. Approach is radically different and the writing's fantastic. Globes is wonderful as well but I've yet to read Foam. Started with Cynical Reason and the Rilke book.

[Anonymous No.15383720]

>>15382196
Currently half-way through globes and it stays really great throughout the whole thing.
The books seem to ooze with insight and knowledge in every chapter for me. It's really great.
P SL. is a great philospher and I'm having a lot of fun with it.

[Anonymous No.15383722]

>>15383703
>>15383717
What does he mean when he says that God did not really create Adam, but rather he and Adam existed always in a reciprocal relationship? I don't get it.

[Anonymous No.15383752]

>>15383720
>I'm having a lot of fun with it.
He really is a lot of fun to read.

[Anonymous No.15383757]

>>15383720
Why isn't Peter Sloterdijk considered the quintessential conservative thinker of our time instead of boring liberals like Jordan Peterson

[Anonymous No.15383758]

>>15382196
I'm just glad Sloterdijk is actually being discussed in this shithole

[Anonymous No.15383760]

>>15383757
Because the majority of conservatives don't read beyond high school level

[Anonymous No.15383769]

>>15383722
My interpretation is that man placed God(or God took the place) in the vacant spot that is left behind when we are separated from our placental twin. The first Sphärenkatastrophe which is our birth leaves us with an undeniable will to re-establish that perfect place in which it was only the two of us.

[Anonymous No.15384067]

>>15383675

[Anonymous No.15384120]

>>15383675
>Spheres deals with "spaces of coexistence", spaces commonly overlooked or taken for granted which conceal information crucial to developing an understanding of humanity. The exploration of these spheres begins with the basic difference between mammals and other animals: the biological and utopian comfort of the mother's womb, which humans try to recreate through science, ideology, and religion. From these microspheres (ontological relations such as fetus-placenta) to macrospheres (macro-uteri such as states), Sloterdijk analyzes spheres where humans try but fail to dwell and traces a connection between vital crises (e.g., emptiness and narcissistic detachment) and crises created when a sphere shatters.

>Sloterdijk has said that the first paragraphs of Spheres are "the book that Heidegger should have written", a companion volume to Being and Time, namely, "Being and Space".[citation needed] He was referring to his initial exploration of the idea of Dasein, which is then taken further as Sloterdijk distances himself from Heidegger's positions.

Sounds pretty gay. Or can someone explain the relevance of fetus-placenta-being. Is this Varg shit?

[Anonymous No.15384350]

>>15384120
Imagine living the first few month of your life in perfect harmony. Only you and the placenta who was your trusty companion.
After your birth everything is fucked, the perfect sphere which you inhabited and where your "twin" fed you your nutrients, your oxygen are all gone.
Throughout our lives we will try to recreate this sphere and occupy the position of our twin.

[Anonymous No.15384361]

what is interesting about it?

[Anonymous No.15384407]

>>15382196
If this were written by a woman you guys would be trashing it, whether or not you've read it.

[Anonymous No.15384421]

>>15384350
Does Sloterdijk believe in a literal God? And has he proposed any solutions to all these problems he critiques?

[Anonymous No.15384429]

>>15384407
Why did you make this post? How does this add anything of value to the discussion?

[Anonymous No.15385102]

>>15384421
bump

[Anonymous No.15385106]

>>15384067

[Anonymous No.15385230]

What does Sloterdijk have to say about the metaphysics of space? Descriptions like >>15384120 always make it sound like he's a sociologist, but I know that's not what he's getting at. I'm guessing he writes in opposition to the Kantian conception that space is an empty condition for existence, but how does he conceive of the alternative? Is space inherently ontogenic? Are some points in space privileged or is there a uniformity of possibility across the universe?

I'll read Sloterdijk at some point but until now I haven't gotten a real grasp of what he's trying to do based on descriptions of his work. He sounds like an original and interesting philosopher despite summaries not doing him much credit.

[Anonymous No.15385260]

>>15383760
That is probably true I suppose

[Anonymous No.15385346]

>>15384421
No (see Heidegger's Geivert) and yes.

[Anonymous No.15385351]

>>15384421
It isn't up to PS to believe in a literal God for you, anon, but rather up to you. Weirdly he does positively eviscerate Dawkins and co. at the beginning of You Must Change Your Life, however. There are no 'atheists' per se, just ignorant or improperly trained (in that sphere) human beings.

[Anonymous No.15385355]

>>15382196
HOT HOT GARBAGE

[Anonymous No.15385373]

>>15385346
What are his solutions?

[Anonymous No.15385444]

>>15385373
Off the top of my head his notion of "co-immunism" is supposed to be some kind of solution or at least positive program.
Also, he has proposed as a solution to the problems with the modern welfare state and it's rage banks that the rich should return to a concept of noblesse oblige and we should switch to a system of voluntary "gifts" where opulent spending on public works, welfare, the arts and so on by the rich is gratefully accepted by the population. I guess like any other great German philosopher Sloterdijk is bound to have some questionable political stances. . . .

[Anonymous No.15385529]

>>15385351
>Weirdly he does positively eviscerate Dawkins and co.
What does he say about them?

[Anonymous No.15385593]

>>15385529
he said dawkins has the accent of a dehydrated man and the chest of a tuberculosis patient. he talks about it in his joe rogan appearance

[Anonymous No.15385625]

>>15385593
Oh. I thought you meant Sloterdijk critiques Dawkins's atheism or something.

[Anonymous No.15385642]

>>15385625
he was going to but when joe offered him a doobie he realized god wasn't actually real. he writes about it in You Must Smoke Weed Every Day of Your Life

[Anonymous No.15385669]

>>15383722
he's wrong, so it doesn't matter. first of all, adam was never real, the bible isn't true. second of all, even as a literary character it's clear from the bible that god created adam. why does anyone take this retard seriously?

[Anonymous No.15385740]

>>15385593
>>15385642
I wanted a serious answer.

[Anonymous No.15385803]

>>15385740
bazinga!

[Anonymous No.15385855]

he's controlled opposition

[Anonymous No.15385864]

>>15385855

The most adorable thing that he does is to describe fascists as "losers" Wow, what a bold, contrarian statement. What a philosophically important comment.

[Anonymous No.15385990]

>>15383722
It's not that God is in a reciprocal relationship with Adam, it's that the existence of God mutually includes the existence of Being i.e. God exists intimately alongside reality.

>>15385230
He describes the Globes project as the necessary companion to Being and Time: Being and Space. Heidegger fails when he dislocates Dasein from any place. In Sloterdijk's opinion, this "lonely" turn is also why Heidegger becomes a tragic fascist.

[Anonymous No.15386009]

>>15384407
Correct, and that's a good thing that is moral and worthy of praise

[Anonymous No.15386012]

>>15385864
Not sure where/if Sloterdijk says this, but it's worth considering that he would probably mean "loser" in a much more radical sense then you are considering since his entire project is about the possibility of continuity. As Sloterdijk says in Spheres, history is all about "the survival of the most beautiful."

[Anonymous No.15386017]

>>15385669
What kind of brainlet take is this?
God isn't real so any and all studies on a topic that followed us for the last two thousand years is meaningless?

[Anonymous No.15386023]

>>15384407
This is especially funny because Sloterdijk literally worships women.

[Anonymous No.15386035]

>>15385990
>his "lonely" turn is also why Heidegger becomes a tragic fascist.
Why would it? Isn't place a very nationalistic or even pastoral concern? Germania, Der Ister. Late Heidegger has the concept of homecoming (Heimkunft).

[Anonymous No.15386043]

>>15384407
You’re right
Women are trash
Thank god a man wrote it

[Anonymous No.15386045]

What does Sloterdijk think about Jews? I know that he named the Rothschilds in an interview once.

[Anonymous No.15386052]

>>15386012
>but it's worth considering that he would probably mean "loser" in a much more radical sense

cringe my kek

the absolute state of sloterdijkians

[Anonymous No.15386059]

>>15385864
>The most adorable thing that he does is to describe fascists as "losers"
Monarchy is better.

[Anonymous No.15386064]

>>15386012
>history is all about "the survival of the most beautiful."
le divine providence face

[Anonymous No.15386085]

>>15386023
what makes you say that

[Anonymous No.15386167]

>>15385444
What is co-immunism

[Anonymous No.15386258]

>>15382196
Yes, it is excellent. Globes and Foams are even better though.

[Anonymous No.15386289]

>>15386167
"Being-with" as "being-together."

[Anonymous No.15386369]

>>15386017
amazing job only responding to part of my post and completely ignoring the other. even if you're talking about god as a literary character/fiction/myth etc it's false that he didn't create adam so slotherdijk is a retard and only intellectually dishonest pseuds like yourself read him.

[Anonymous No.15386382]

>>15386012
history isn't about
>"the survival of the most beautiful."
at all, this faggot literally just pulls shit from out of his asshole and pseuds lap it up because he references plato?

[Anonymous No.15386399]

I have a copy of it sitting on my shelf. I got 20 pages into it, but pretty quickly recognized that I didn’t have a good background for comprehending everything it had to offer. What are some recommended prerequisite readings?

[Anonymous No.15386442]

>>15386167
Immunity revers to the ability to form coherent and stable organization for individuals while shielding them against the outside.
The outside being chaos end existential danger.
This starts with the simple example of early human groups forming a circle around a fire signifying community.
The first city states (SL uses Uruk as example) delivered a package deal where within the city and its system all humans lived with common gods and king.
With the greeks the spherical immune system was elevated into the metaphysical plane where it still resides and was further developed by Christianity.
Today with the continued decline of Christianity people in the west find it harder and harder to form coherent immunity to the "outside".

>>15386399
He pretty much goes from here to there and draws from all kinds of sources. Its probably best to just go with it and maybe quickly read up on some of the topics as they come up when you want to know more.
Most is pretty easy to grasp from the context he provides.

[Anonymous No.15386484]

>>15386399
Just keep reading anything you regard as 'difficult' for a few years to pick up your reading skill. In terms of the content he draws from, it's so wide that almost any reading on any serious subject will gave you an entry point somewhere but no-one will pick up on everything he is implying unless you have also spent a lifetime in literature and philosophy (as Slaughter-the-dykes has).

More helpfully; some anthropology, some Greek philosophy, and a basic grounding in theology would do.

[Anonymous No.15386611]

>>15386442
Ok but I still don't understand what exactly he means by co-immunism. Is it just another word for globalism, everyone living together, coexisting, etc.? I thought he didn't like globalism.

[Anonymous No.15386659]

he needs to get a fucking haircut, its not the 60s anymore

[Anonymous No.15386759]

>>15386611
>I thought he didn't like globalism.
Well once the cat is out of the bag (globalism) there isn't a going back isn't there? We can't really turn back time but have to make the current situation work.
Here is a short summary on some of the key concepts he develops throughout the three books and some others.
https://ecpr.eu/filestore/paperproposal/360087b2-c31f-413c-b33d-88b69534e9ab.pdf
> Dwelling" on" the" history" of"
humankind"and"the"emergence"of"more"and"more"complex"polities,"politics"and"policies"enables"
him" to"summarize" the"governing"principles" for" the"universalizing"community"in" the"concept"of"
co=immunism."The"basic"idea"of"co=immunism"is"that"human"beings"depend"on"bio=,"socio= and"
psycho=immunological" resources," which can" be" generated" only" in" collaborative" modes." The"
negation"of"the"other"results"automatically"in"a"reduction"of"one’s"own"immunity.

[Anonymous No.15386806]

>>15386759
So how is co-immunism different from the mainstream leftist ideas of multi-culturalism? It sounds like the same thing to me.
How does Sloterdijk reconcile co-immunism with his anti-immigrant stance?

[Anonymous No.15386816]

>>15386806
How about just read Sloterdijk instead of constantly swinging and missing on 4channel?

[Anonymous No.15386831]

>>15386816
I am reading Bubbles right now but I still don't understand how co-immunism is different from multi-culturalism.

[Anonymous No.15386959]

>>15386831
Hmm, I apologize for being dismissive.

My interpretation is that Sloterdijk uses 'immunity' as that social barrier that polices who is 'in' and 'out' (as explained in Globes), thus co-immunity is a sort of togetherness that we generate in our understanding and care for each other as co-citizens. This is a philosophically deeper than the largely bland 'multi-culturalism' that abstractly puts multiple 'peoples' under the jurisdiction of one state without really examining or asking what the consequences of that will be or having an understanding of how culture or the 'plural first person' arises.

In Foams, he examines how the shattering of the larger national spheres has led to a sort of multi-layered, and dynamic constant re-production of "we"'s.

[Anonymous No.15387000]

>>15386959
>>15386959
And how does his anti-immigrant stance relate to this

[Anonymous No.15387038]

>>15387000
I don't interpret Sloterdijk as being normatively anti-immigrant. He just has produced an analysis of how "societies" have arrived at keeping 'others' out.

[Anonymous No.15387088]

>>15387038
He has been accused of racism and of being against Syrian refugees.

[Anonymous No.15387111]

>>15387088
...ok?

[Anonymous No.15387143]

>>15382196
Do you need to of read Heidegger before tackling Sloterdijk (Spheres)? And is YMCYL a good read? I have a copy back home that I was gifted but have never read.

[Anonymous No.15387154]

>>15387143
>Heidegger
Useful but not mandatory. 'You Must Change Your Life' is incredible.

[Anonymous No.15387322]

>>15387154
do you have anything more interesting to say about the books than it was "incredible" and "interesting?

[Anonymous No.15387434]

>>15387038
He said explicitly that the refugees will destroy Germany.

[Anonymous No.15387656]

>>15387322
Inspirational? Intriguing? Entertaining?

[Anonymous No.15387779]

>>15387434
Interesting, would you mind directing me to the article or speech or interview where he said it.

>>15387322
Bruno Latour said it better than I ever could: "the most amazing series of practices invented in history to hold human souls suspended by a virtual hook slightly above their head... a totally original analysis of religion by the most important philosopher... of today."

[Anonymous No.15387869]

>>15387779
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/02/26/a-celebrity-philosopher-explains-the-populist-insurgency

[Anonymous No.15388422]

>>15387656
yes but also confusing sometimes desu anon

[Anonymous No.15389110]

Who would win in a debate between Sloterdijk and Zizek

[Anonymous No.15389143]

What's his stance on the Jewish question?

[Anonymous No.15389158]

>>15389143
He named the Rothschilds in a video.

[Anonymous No.15389213]

>>15389110

[Anonymous No.15389228]

>>15386369
He's making a fairly obvious and clear metaphor at that point in the text but it'll probably go over your head if you're missing all of the Heideggerian debates Sloterdijk is in conversation with. The point is just that the human being does not pre exist it's sources of inspiration/dispensation of being, which have traditionally (in premodern society) been interpreted as "divine". It's perfectly clear and intelligible. You just have to actually do your homework, not expect everything to be immediately intelligible without any effort or background study.

[Anonymous No.15389795]

>>15386045
>I can't make up my own mind
> oh noo someone has to tell me what to think
> Pl3easeeeee tell me, is he based?
Fuck off

[Anonymous No.15390334]

>>15385990
lmao is this really what he says? that if you don't larp with a placenta you might become fascist?

[Anonymous No.15390819]

>>15387869
>In 1979, he moved to India, where he studied with the guru Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh, near Pune
So he is the oshofag

[Anonymous No.15391279]

>>15389795
I'm just wondering. Stop being mean to me.

[Anonymous No.15391718]

>>15389213
What do they have in common?

[Anonymous No.15391746]

>>15387869
this profile didn't really do much explication on his ideas. all it did was show that he's a libertarian retard who likes to do hot takes to stay in the news

[Anonymous No.15391796]

>>15386484
Damn I'm not a faggot but I would call this man daddy and let him fist my asshole

[Anonymous No.15391813]

can someone upload a pdfs of all 3 volumes (English and or German)? they're not on libgen.

[Anonymous No.15391818]

>>15386167
>>15386611
>>15386806
>>15386831
>>15387000
>>15387088
>How do this author's complex ideas fit into my one-dimensional worldview? I want to read this based German (nazi?) thinker so I can sound intelligent (I'm not) online
Unironically kys

[Anonymous No.15391884]

>>15391818
>stop asking questions and trying to understand what you're reading you stupid nazi
Wow insightful post

[Anonymous No.15392134]

>>15385444
>I guess like any other great German philosopher Sloterdijk is bound to have some questionable political stances. . . .
Are there lots of conservative Germans? I was under the impression that Germany is very left wing these days.

[Anonymous No.15392619]

bump

[Anonymous No.15392854]

How's his "What Happened in the Twentieth Century?"

[Anonymous No.15393606]

>>15391718
Not a lot, some of Zizek's work is restating or answering Sloterdijk's arguments. I haven't seen the reverse.

[Anonymous No.15393659]

>>15392134
AfD is currently polling ~12-13% if that's an indicator.

[Anonymous No.15394868]

>>15382196
Cynical Reason and World interior of Capital is his best books. Spheres is bloated.