Why do people lie about philosophy?

[Anonymous No.18796853]

Every time I actually read an entire work of philosophy, It is never anything like what I've heard about it. In fact, it has been exposed that academic second-hand writers barely read or understand the primary text. They simply read other second-hand sources and interpret a work like that.

Hegel for example, is covered in myths and lies.
>The Hegelian dialectic
>The end of art
>Incomprehensible writing

When I first started studying Hegel, I noticed that none of these were present in his work. I later found out they were basically made up by "Hegel Scholars" who lied about him. Then of course there is the 20th century effort to secularize every philosopher before the 20th century in order to fit with neo-liberal globalism. Going as far as liberal Hegel readers claiming the "Absolute" is simply just darwinian human development and other foolish things.

So why do people lie about philosophers? To cover up their real message? Or pure stupidity?

Great video on the topic:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TvFu6ak_SGk

[Anonymous No.18796863]

>>18796853
>Then of course there is the 20th century effort to secularize every philosopher before the 20th century in order to fit with neo-liberal globalism.
meds

[Anonymous No.18796870]

>>18796863
>the state doesn't do things in they're own interest
No, you take your meds

[Anonymous No.18796910]

>>18796870
Schizo. Jouvenel was a founding member of the Mont Pelerin Society and the neoliberal global order (a betrayal of his fascist roots). Has anyone tried to "secularize" Augustine?

[Anonymous No.18796971]

>>18796910
>Schizo
tranny
>Jouvenel was a founding member of the Mont Pelerin Society and the neoliberal global order (a betrayal of his fascist roots)
If anything this just proves his model correct

>Has anyone tried to "secularize" Augustine?
How many 20th century philosophy surveys ignore scholasticism completely?

>And uh...then...uh...angels dancing on the pin of a needle....and...aquinas and aristotle...so anyway, Descartes
and that's at best

[Anonymous No.18797014]

>>18796971
Augustine isn't a scholastic.

[Anonymous No.18797023]

>>18796853
Going to hazard a guess and say it’s because philosophy and many other subjects as time goes on have been less and less a source of wisdom and understanding but more of a place for losers to cope and pretend they sound smart and better than everyone else when in reality materially and spiritually they’re no wiser than anyone else they just like using fancy terms and drawn out descriptions to cloud the fact that they’re full of it. Feel like it happened after the greeks and the more time went on it got worse and worse which is why most philosophy is nonsense scribbled onto pages

[Anonymous No.18797030]

>>18797023
“Philosophy has never been so rigorous, so productive of clarity, so intellectually illuminating, as since the revolution in method which is associated above all with the name of Wittgenstein.”
--Alasdair Macintyre

[Anonymous No.18797044]

>>18797014
Obviously

>>18797023
What does this have to do with why people lie about philosophy? Philosophy is as relevant, if not more relevant, now than it was in Ancient Greece. People are all still operating under the same pre-suppositions which define their actions now, except they're even less aware of it now as they walk around like zombies under the spell of Cartesian-Darwinian-Secularism. They're so deeply steeped in this, they're not even aware of it because after 1945 Westerners have purposely not received any education in philosophy, and the theology seminaries have the same issue which then colors in the pre-suppositions of the remaining church-goers. Essentially Cartesian-Atheist Christians.

>after the greeks
Greeks were far more non-sensical than the philosophy which followed them. People speculating about the world being made of fire and Plato's tedious non-sensical socratic dialogues basically serving as a University Of Phoenix scam degree.

>most philosophy is nonsense scribbled onto pages
And this is the issue, people today have been gatekept from philosophy believing it's "nonsense" because they're intimidated away from it

[Anonymous No.18797077]

>>18797044
The medieval philosophers and theologians were not only heavily indebted to Hellenic philosophy, but also hugely influential on modern philosophy. It seems odd, then, to single them out as uniquely praiseworthy (or blameworthy, for that matter), especially given the diversity of philosophical opinion among medieval thinkers. I feel like you are operating largely on emotional prejudices and preconceptions, and ought to read more of, and about, the thinkers you despise. Whenever I've had a bad opinion about some school of thought in the history of philosophy, actual engagement with said school or movement has tended to render my judgements more charitable, even if I don't end up agreeing with any of it. I feel like your anti-modernism is an aesthetic posture, more than a carefully analysed and articulated position (it is, in that sense, thoroughly un-Scholastic). Certainly there are valid criticisms of modernity latent in your embryonic attitude, but it is modern philosophers, above all, who have pursued them (for who else can?). It is true that most people are ignorant of the nature of the ideas haunting their heads, but hasn't that generally always been the case?

[Anonymous No.18797144]

>>18797077
I think you have him pegged, anon

[Anonymous No.18797167]

>>18796853
>posting gookshit
die

[Anonymous No.18797346]

>>18797167
>>18797077
I don't even know what you're responding to exactly

>gr33ks were highly influential on all of philosophy
I'm not saying the Greeks, or any school of philosophy is *bad*, that doesn't even make sense. History from our point of view can only be neutral. I think it's bad to use Plato as a starting point for philosophy, as I would choose Heraclitus if I had to pick a Greek, but that's beside the point.

>anti-modernism
I don't even believe modernity is real. That's a big marketing campaign by uni pomos and their faux-detractors. I'm simply stating that there is NO class of people in the west now who are self-aware of their own pre-suppositions, they are simply indifferent grindsetting Cartesian-Atheists and have never heard a contrarian view on this in their lives. Most of the society is actually HOSTILE to philosophy at all because they simply have no idea what it is. They think it's weird abstractions about "is a chair real?" or self-help shit like what Jordan Peterstein is serving up.

Of course, I understand why this is happening in the historical process and why it was destined to happen. My question was "Why do people within the academic system lie about philosophy?" These are the ONLY class of people interacting with philosophic text and most of them are lying careerist relativists who are at this point blatantly making up things about the texts and spreading them to the mass who are already indifferent and turned off to philosophy.

>hasn't that always been the case?
debatable about to what degrees this has been the case, but I would say today it is more daunting than ever that a mass population are born deathly ill with nihilistic pre-suppositions that are entirely NEGATIVE to all positive pre-suppositions. I can't identify another time in history (that we know of) where this happened, even the "atheist" movements of the ancient world weren't really "atheist" movements in this sense.

[Anonymous No.18797373]

>>18797346
>My question was "Why do people within the academic system lie about philosophy?" These are the ONLY class of people interacting with philosophic text and most of them are lying careerist relativists who are at this point blatantly making up things about the texts and spreading them to the mass who are already indifferent and turned off to philosophy.
Post some examples please.
>mass population are born deathly ill with nihilistic pre-suppositions that are entirely NEGATIVE to all positive pre-suppositions
not really
>even the "atheist" movements of the ancient world weren't really "atheist" movements in this sense.
ancient 'atheists' either tended to be atomists or radical sceptics, whereas today's atheists subscribe to all kinds of moral pieties and metaphysical dogmas like naturalism and scientific positivism

[Anonymous No.18797383]

>>18797373
>Post some examples please.
posted video in the OP

[Anonymous No.18797402]

>>18797383
That's a 40 minute video and I doubt that anyone is "lying" about Hegel. Hegel is a notoriously obscure and wildly competing interpretations of his philosophy emerged even amongst his students.

[Anonymous No.18797416]

>>18797402
>That's a 40 minute video
uhh yeah we're talking about philosophy
>I doubt anyone is "lying"
why?
>Hegel is notoriously obscure
this is one of the lies

[Anonymous No.18797431]

>>18797416
Who lied and why? How do you know Burke's interpretation is the correct one and not just another in a long line of creative eisegeses?

[Anonymous No.18797579]

You'll find academics lie a lot, not just about philosophy. They pass eachother lies and create a self-aggrandising mythology.

[Anonymous No.18797743]

>>18796853
Hegel did say that Art as civilizational drive was over with the Greeks.

Marx shares this sentiment.

IN a way Art is dead.

[Anonymous No.18797979]

>>18797743
No, he didn't. Read Hegel's aesthetics, he says nothing like this. This is another myth.

Hegel said art was able to fully express itself in greco-roman art because the Idea of the Greeks was simple enough to be fully articulated in sculpture. He said the Christian-Romantic idea was too complex/profound to be fully articulated through art, so man had now transcended art, but art would still continue to be produced to express the Geist. It just isn't AS important as it was for the Greeks because they NEEDED art.

>Marx shares this sentiment
Marx was a jewish shill who made it up and other brain dead pant-shitting academics parroted it. If you look where Marx said it, he has no reference.

[Anonymous No.18798135]

>>18796853
>in order to fit with neo-liberal globalism.
It has little to do with this and more to do with the fact that publish-or-perish incentivizes hot takes like this.

[Anonymous No.18798204]

>>18798135
>It has little to do with this and more to do with the fact that publish-or-perish incentivizes hot takes like this.
oh yes of course, the federally funded colleges need to sell books in order to survive!!! It's the effects of capitalism!!!

nobody is reading ANY of these books either way, it has nothing to do with money

[Anonymous No.18798322]

>>18796853
Modern philosophy is like modernist art except with random words instead of random splashes of paint. You do that until you have a book, and if someone says it's bullshit you laugh smugly and push your glasses up your nose and go
>You are just not smart enough to understand. Nothing personnel...
Bravo Slaughterdick

[Anonymous No.18799135]

>>18796853
K-anon, how long have you been reading philosophy?

[Anonymous No.18799185]

>>18799135
I think 3 or 4 years

[Anonymous No.18799230]

>>18797579
This

[Anonymous No.18799257]

>>18796863
>Ten shekels were transfered to your account

[Anonymous No.18799265]

>>18797044
>Greeks were far more non-sensical than the philosophy which followed them. People speculating about the world being made of fire and Plato's tedious non-sensical socratic dialogues basically serving as a University Of Phoenix scam degree.

[Anonymous No.18799285]

>>18799265
Plato was absolute shit and anyone defending him has either never read him or fell for the straussian meme.

I’m not going to reply with a basedjak, you guzzle strauss cum.

[Anonymous No.18799301]

>>18799285
You're arguing against this "Cartesian-Darwinian-modernist" boogeyman, and yet you consider the Greeks to be a priori incorrect in their metaphysical theories because "they're just dumb, ok?". What is your basis for truth, or are you just intent on attacking everything that doesn't conform to your exact, unexamined, and a priori conception of "reality"? You're an ignorant fool, and I also know you're the same anon from an earlier thread who used the same vulgar language.

[Anonymous No.18799326]

>>18799301
Im saying if you’re concerned about “scribbling nonsense”, the Greeks were worse. Im not saying their theories on the earth being flat and held up by clouds or the unity of opposites are wrong, I agree with them more than empricucks today

>vulgar language
Cope, seethe, and suck 50 dicks

[soursore !!5HEGfvI0zIR No.18800345]

b-u-m-p.

[Anonymous No.18800538]

>>18797023

I agree. Philosophy is just incel word salad. In fact I'm suspicious about your post because it's written too long and complicatedly. Just say "they pretend to be smart and they're gay" r u gay?

[Anonymous No.18800867]

>>18796853
Because it creates clamour for reform.
So the political class world wide to squeeze as much resources possible from the rest try to erase clamour from reform.

Formerly it was the Inquisition, while the "Index" in the true sense doesn't exist anymore, every single book of philosophy and even history that you didn't read will be distorted to conform to the current status quo ruling class narrative.

This is nothing new, was so in middle ages, control was lost with gutenpress and 30 years war didn't solve the problem, but biggest lie is to believe techniques for control have ceased.

There are more efficient ways to supress truth than Inquisition and Index, which are literally Medieval methods for Medieval Age.

Now you get sophisticated methods for information age, and given 95% of people won't bother reading philosophy books, this is more scary than anything assange or snowden warned of, but at the same time it's business as usual since Sumeria and before.

It has been done for 6000 years in many different ways.

Even if you break this "cultural mind control" you will be part of the 5% or less that bothered to, so the ruling class doesn't have to bother.

Asides from Iluminism and Printing Press, I can't think of any other two major worldwide instances of loss of control of narrative since fall of rome.

Obviously there were more, but some were so impactful (iluminism led to french revolution and napoleon) that it's impossible to erase from history.