/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.15470722]

most overrated philosopher of all time.
complete hack.

[Anonymous No.15470748]

>>15470722
Kant? More like Cunt.

[Anonymous No.15470749]

>>15470722
This isnt Descartes

[Anonymous No.15470750]

>>15470722
Kant? More like Cunt.

[Anonymous No.15470751]

>>15470749
Correct

[Anonymous No.15470780]

>>15470749
In awe at this lad's perception

[Anonymous No.15470784]

>>15470722
Isn't this Joseph Goebbles?
Atleast he got some mad pusy in his prime

[Ausbro !PepeRAC3Rg No.15470819]

>>15470749
>>15470751
>>15470780
all of you kill yourselves. Day Kart is based and you are just too stupid to get on his level

[Anonymous No.15470829]

>>15470819
I'm a bigger fan of Night Kart my self.

[Anonymous No.15470834]

>>15470819
> tripcode
god damn cross board posting. removed.

edgy atheists are the absolute worst look-at-me-i'm-so-smart pseudointellectuals who are actually average/ sub average IQ retards who can not understand subtle, abstract or advanced reason

[Anonymous No.15470841]

>>15470722
And the most overrated philosopher of all time has to be Rosseau, the absolute piece of shit

If he were alive today I would seriously consider slitting that disgusting subhuman's throat. Then if he died I would wish for resurrection powers just to kill him again. Absolutely reprehensible monster that he was.

[Anonymous No.15470887]

>>15470841
I wonder who's behind this post

[Anonymous No.15471003]

>>15470887
lmao, so you know about that huh? I disagree with Voltaire on a lot of things, but nothing like I fucking fucking FUCKING HATE LOATHE DESPISE Rousseau the dumb gay completely retarded FAGGOT

yes I mad, the mere thought of Rosseau fucking trolls me. Reading his shit, and realizing he was basically the father of all modern shitty collectivist thought (though that's only one example of a hundred that fucking piss me off about that CUNT), was one of the most enraging experiences.

I am literally mad just typing this out

[Anonymous No.15471006]

Another thread exhibiting the plain fact that nobody here reads.

[Anonymous No.15471012]

>>15470722
you underestimate the power of the two a priori sensible intuitions of space and time

[Anonymous No.15471017]

>>15471006
another post exhibiting that you're a projecting retard

[Anonymous No.15471024]

>>15471006
imagine being filtered by /lit/ kek.

[Anonymous No.15471027]

>>15471003
> still mad
...so I'm going to keep raging. Reading a translation of that fucking subhuman going on about how social morality can be reduced to a mathematics/ science.. reading him talking about the collective loss of stealing which roundabout hurts you and therefore you have an incentive not to steal (lmao), reading everything he wrote

I am so mad I am double posting.

Nobody read this fucking monster's drivel. Read some sociopolitical thought which should be more popular instead, like Paine who was extremely based and red pilled until he started going down the socialist rabbit hole, or Bastiat the extremely based and red pill gentleman

[Anonymous No.15471060]

>>15471027
>social morality can be reduced to a mathematics/ science
he was right about that though

[Anonymous No.15471088]

>>15471060
No, he didn't posit it in the way you think he did. He was a legitimate retard man.

[Anonymous No.15471109]

>>15471003
>>15470841
>>15471027
Out of all the philosophers in the world, You got filtered by Rousseau ? You know he was just doing the 18th century version of shitposting, right ?

[Anonymous No.15471122]

Considering this board status it is definitely Stirner. He has a lot of historic value, but I can't see how people in here even bother reading the whole thing, for sure there are way better works derived of it.

[Anonymous No.15471127]

>>15471122

I can see his book being a really good read, but in a whole different manner than most of the anons in here are able to read.

[Anonymous No.15471133]

>>15471122
Sitner's meme potential is only rivalled by Hegel though, and even that happens rarely

[Anonymous No.15471153]

>>15471133

Oh how could I forget that. The meme is all and all must be meme. Feels Marx

[Anonymous No.15471175]

>>15471133
how is Hegel meme tier?

[Anonymous No.15471192]

>>15471175
Read his work and ask me this question again

[Anonymous No.15471198]

>>15471175

This is Marxism

[Anonymous No.15471278]

>>15471192
I didn't say I agreed with him lol, I just thought you meant something else. I read Philosophy Of Right when I was trawling all the major philosophers, and thought he was incoherent and obviously hypocritical. The absolute worst example is his critique of conscience. Honestly I hate him and think he was a bad man.

Nevertheless I thought you meant like... "he walked right into that joke!" kind of thing

[Anonymous No.15471928]

>>15471175
book hard

[Anonymous No.15471936]

>>15470722
Hume is the most overrated

[Anonymous No.15471954]

>>15470722
You just got filtered.

[Anonymous No.15472502]

>>15471936

Hume is based and underrated

[Anonymous No.15472759]

Stirner, Guenon, Evola etc. can’t even be considered overrated because they’re only rated highly at all by the abject memers on this board. Stirner probably had the most influence out of that bunch, but as >>15471122 said his influence is largely historical and subsequent philosophers have used his ideas to more influential ends. Genuinely most overrated might be Adam Smith (his ideas ≠ what he’s actually known for), or perhaps Voltaire (glorified funposter) or Bergson (the phenomenology of time was handled much better by other people like Husserl and Heidegger)

[Anonymous No.15472784]

>>15470722
Such a negative dude. After all, you don't know what you Kan do until you try.

[Anonymous No.15472821]

Nietzsche or Schopenhauer

[Anonymous No.15472831]

>>15470722
look at this doooooood ahahahaha oh nononononono look at the size of his heeeeeeeeeeeeeadhfgfdahahahaha oh nononono

[Anonymous No.15472845]

>>15472759
23 non french anons must have talked about Bergson in the entire history of /lit/, can't really say he's overrated.

[Anonymous No.15472851]

>>15470722
Huh. I didn't know this is what Searle looks like.

[Anonymous No.15472858]

>>15471122
Stirner isn't actually that well known outside of here and Marxist academics though.

[Anonymous No.15472947]

>>15470722
Don't know if hegel is overated or underated because i don't understand it and i am convinced that no one else does

[Anonymous No.15472963]

>>15470722
>>15471936
Nah mates.

[Anonymous No.15472984]

>>15470722
I appreciate his ambition, but he ultimately assumes in the Metaphysics of Morals that the law must exist because we must be accountable because reasons. If you don't buy this underlying assumption his ethics crumble.

[Anonymous No.15472988]

>>15472845
Oh I wasn’t talking about overrated on /lit/, I meant amongst philosophers and in the academy more generally. Bergson was huge in the late 19th and early 20th centuries; people flocked to hear him and he even won a Nobel Prize (lol). He probably isn’t the most overrated in history, but he’s certainly in contention within the past 150 years or so

[Anonymous No.15473058]

>>15470722
Objective reality is not represented by our perceptions. We have no direct knowledge of what is "out there". Don't you realize how significant that is?

[Anonymous No.15473069]

>>15472947
He is both overrated and underrated. You are correct about the last part.

[Anonymous No.15473084]

>>15472947

[Anonymous No.15473086]

>>15470841
You seem like a shittier person than Rousseau.

[Anonymous No.15473140]

>>15473084
Based

[Anonymous No.15473230]

>>15470722
>needs to assume beforehand the existance of god for all of his system to make sense
LMAO

[Anonymous No.15473260]

>>15470722
His epistemology was pretty based but his ethics is garbage.

[Anonymous No.15473631]

>>15473230
Not really. At least not however you think of God. In fact, it's not an uncommon view that Kant was a closeted atheist.

[Anonymous No.15473716]

>>15473058
I realized that when I was 10.

[Anonymous No.15473739]

>>15473260
>ethics is garbage
Lolwut
Literally the most important, strongest, and enduring part of his oeuvre. Read pic-related.

[Anonymous No.15474041]

>>15473058
But our perceptions objectively exist no? How come our representations themselves be things-in-themselves.

[Anonymous No.15475173]

>>15473086
It is morally justified to destroy incorrigible monsters, anon. Righteous even.

[Anonymous No.15475204]

>>15473739
yeah right? fuck the object of the moral act, the only thing that matters is following the perfect formula of ought found at the limit practical reason so that I, a good boy, aint doing the bad thing, even if immediately after bad things happen. Is the kingdom of ends here already?

[Anonymous No.15475270]

>>15472988
Sorry m8 didn't realise you weren't talking about the board. He's still relatively well known in France because he's a really useful tool when doing philosophy of life and time. I'd say s*rtre is more overrated : everyone sucks his dick but he's completely forgottenby academia

[Anonymous No.15475274]

>>15473058
dont u realize the consequence of such a stupid statement? first: truth is a matter of universably possible experience, a.k.a. mere opinion
second, the agent of causality is the subject, so fuck the big bang, or even the emergence of life, that shit didnt happen because time space causality and any disctinction of one object to another are categories of the mind, and with no mind no causal chain of events led to the creation of life (and subjects) or the universe. So right here and now i tell you, either Kant or Darwin, the both of them are not compatible, choose wisely
third: negation on any relation between phenomena and noumena. Is it really that crazy to believe that, since our mind is always already there and directed at something, that when we see that something we are actually percieving qualities based upon that same thing-in-itself? I do not claim that we can know the whole thing, i just claim that things have properties and we can know some of them, and that our immanent world is not mutilated from reality as a whole but in fact something included in it, like the images of a pc we see in a monitor in relation to all reality.

[Anonymous No.15475291]

>>15470722
Confirmed for retard.
Correct answer is Hegel.

[Anonymous No.15475297]

>>15475291
hegel is superior to kant in any possible way

[Anonymous No.15475378]

OP is just too stupid to understand Kant.