/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.16498338]

Otto Weininger was right about women.

[Anonymous No.16498362]

and "men"

[Anonymous No.16498380]

>>16498338
What did he say?

[Anonymous No.16498388]

>>16498380
They give meaning to his life and work.

[Anonymous No.16498425]

weinigger

[Anonymous No.16498436]

>>16498338
Weininger is what happens when a magian jew is assimilated into faustian civilization. He tears himself apart.

[Anonymous No.16498636]

So Wittgenstein thought the exact opposite about women?

[Anonymous No.16498643]

>>16498338
Yeah, you have misunderstood Weininger. Read Darren Fartman's introductory essay on him and then reread his work.

[Anonymous No.16499025]

>>16498636
>Wittgenstein doesn’t give us much information to go on, but I propose the following simple explanation for the “negation”:

>Wittgenstein lost three of his brothers to suicide. And Otto Weininger too, whom Wittgenstein perhaps thought of as a kind of brother, killed himself shortly after having written “Sex and Character”. Throughout his life Wittgenstein was to be haunted by thoughts of suicide.

>I suggest, then, that the whole issue of suicide was of huge significance to Wittgenstein, and was an issue to which he was particularly sensitive. He likely perceived a way of thinking in Weininger’s book – an extreme and uncompromising way of thinking – which, it seemed to him, led to an untimely death – and it was especially this which he felt the need to “negate”. Therefore it was not for any tight logical reason that Wittgenstein talked about “negating” Weininger’s book, but rather it was for largely personal and emotional reasons – with his negating serving him perhaps in the manner of a small crucifix which might ward off some kind of demon.

-Kevin Solway

http://www.theabsolute.net/ottow/wreadsw.html

[Anonymous No.16499045]

>>16499025
Why couldnt he just say what he fucking meant