[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 105 KB, 900x900, C3D62470-91D3-4587-896F-BA2CAFBC1166.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
19517211 No.19517211 [Reply] [Original]

How can one read and study as much as Dr Sadler has yet still hold the same political and religious views that are widely accepted in the current milieu? Namely classical liberalism, indifferentism, LGBT acceptance etc. Is it just because he is an academic? I see this in Steve Donoghue as well, who has read thousands of books yet still uncritically holds to mainstream beliefs on everything.

>> No.19517218

>>19517211
Probably because most of that stuff is pretty reasonable and only complete retards think otherwise. The only one you could argue against is liberalism, but most petty bourgeoisie will hold that view as it is in their class interest.

>> No.19517221

>>19517211
I have no idea. I think it's that "the reader determines the meaning" crap in unis or idk

>> No.19517226

>>19517211
Self preservation.

>> No.19517227

>>19517218
No he was part of that ""woke" kant" twitter academic lynch movement

>> No.19517236

It shows how arbitrary personal views are

>> No.19517252

>>19517211
I think it's like w all politics just in for a dime in for a dollar bit

>> No.19517315

>>19517227
Kant is sexist. And Aristotle supported slavery so he was a disgusting racist (as well as a misogynist).

>> No.19517327

>>19517218
>2021
>not being an extremist

at this point anybody like this deserves to be executed. even radical islamists are more human than normielibs, which is why nobody should sweat too much over 9/11.

>> No.19517328

>>19517315
They were both sexists by today's standards, but you have to categorically differentiate the philosopher and his philosophical contributions from the regular people that they were in their private lives.

>> No.19517364

>>19517328
Aristotle literally thought that certain groups of people were naturally more suited to being slaves, he lays this out in the Politics.
> “For that some should rule and others be ruled is a thing not only necessary, but expedient; from the hour of their birth, some are marked out for subjection, others for rule...”
This is obviously racist and wrong. Do you think this is a worthy ‘contribution’ to philosophy? If we can disregard his physics and cosmology, we can disregard his philosophy as well.

>> No.19517379

>>19517364
>Aristotle literally thought that certain groups of people were naturally more suited to being slaves
It's true. I can't believe you've never met any people like that. Maybe you're one of them.

>> No.19517410

>>19517364
You're the white supremacist for enforcing the racialist view on the writing's of a man whose language doesn't even have a word for race as such

>> No.19517414

>>19517211
He seems to mostly have a theorical knowledge of all those he reads, he hasn't intarnalized them. In fact he may have read and understood too wide a variety of writters to teach about to truly be influenced by one of them

>> No.19517420
File: 53 KB, 768x719, 454 - bloodshot_eyes crying flag glasses hair hanging open_mouth purple_hair rope soyjak stubble suicide tongue tranny variant_gapejak_front yellow_teeth.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
19517420

>>19517218
>Probably because most of that stuff is pretty reasonable and only complete retards think otherwise. The only one you could argue against is liberalism, but most petty bourgeoisie will hold that view as it is in their class interest.

>> No.19517431

Still can’t get over the fact that he’s a Catholic with a transgender child.

>> No.19517461

>>19517211
His institutional beliefs are too strong to see past its lense. When you see history as progressive which Hegel did, it's "rational" to have certain zeitgest beliefs (I think even Sadler said Hegel thought it was rational to be a christian at his time) but today a belief in secular liberal globalism is "rational". If you read any older or controversial books with this lens you just think "well if my favorite philosopher was a misogynist then it's just because everyone was at the time", then this belief in history being progressive just overrides anything that attacks the ruling beliefs.

>> No.19517518

>>19517420
You have to be 18 to post here.

>> No.19517636

>>19517518
Is it juvenile to find transgenderism abhorrent?

>> No.19517847

Isn't he at least a theist?
Granted, it's a weird type of monotheism that lets you support lgbtbbq and general globohomo, but still, that's above the baseline of the population.

>> No.19517891

>>19517636
No, but it's definitely juvenile to make low quality posts on /lit/.

>> No.19517942

>>19517847
>>19517431
>>19517414
>wtf why does a dude whose religion is centered on transcendence support transcendence?
...Because that's what his religion is all about? You do realize that most Academic Theologians are ultimately trying to repurpose Aquinas into a theoretical backing so that the Catholic Church can become the ur-NGO for Jewish Finance, right? Sadler, Feser, Dyer, whatever other meme Thomists you can think of, all of them are ultimately about trying to craft a system in which theology supports debt slavery and dehumanization.

He entered this discipline to do this. All of his works are in subservience to this goal.

>> No.19517965

>>19517942
Wtf are you talking about? Dyer isn’t even Catholic or a Thomist.

>> No.19518198

>>19517218
this

>> No.19518403

>>19517364
How can such a thing be racist if it doesn't make any reference to the 'race' of those who are supposed to be ruled?

>> No.19518578

>>19517315
Even Socrates/Plato who is held up to be some kind of champion of the sexes for not forbidding women from the guardian class satisfies your 'misogynist' term in the fullest, writing about the general inferiority of women in Republic 455c
>'Do you know of anything that is practiced by human beings in which the class of men doesn't excel that of women in all respects? Or shall we draw it out at length by speaking of weaving and the care of baked and boiled dishes - just those activities on which the reputation of the female sex is based and where its defeat is most ridiculous of all?' (Socrates)
>'As you say,' he said (Glaucon), 'it's true that the one class is quite dominated in virtually everything, so to speak, by the other. However, many women are better than many men in many things. But as a whole, it is as you say.'
>'Therefore, my friend, there is no practice of a city's governors which belongs to woman because she's woman, or to man because he's man; but the natures are scattered alike among both animals; and women participates according to nature in all practices, and man in all, but in all of them women is weaker than man.' (Socrates)

>> No.19518590

>>19517211
Because current mainstream beliefs are the most sensible. More surprising are the people like E. Michael Jones who have read a lot and somehow acquire the most absurd opinions.

>> No.19518599
File: 812 KB, 1773x1773, D62F5DE0-2ED1-4184-BADA-8AAE12E32445.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
19518599

Reminder that Dr Sadler did a series discussing R. Scott. Bakker’s first trilogy ’Prince of Nothing’. Even the king of philosophy gives praise to king of /Sffg/

>> No.19518619

>>19518578
>Socrates: [giant wall of text]
>Glaucon: Why yes certainly
>Socrates: [giant wall of text]
>Glaucon: Why yes most definitely
>Socrates: [giant wall of text
>Glaucon: Indeed

>> No.19518967

>>19518590
I think his Catholic sensibilities lead him to say stuff like race isn’t genetic or whatever. An interesting fact about E Michael Jones is that he was fired from a Catholic university for his views on abortion in the 70s (he opposed it).

>> No.19519558

>>19518619
Don't forget the
>Socrates: [giant wall of text]
>Glaucon: I don't quite follow you here Socrates, how could that be the case?
>Socrates: Let me see if I can put it to you another way, [giant wall of text]
>Glaucon: By Zeus, Socrates you precisely have it!

>> No.19519722

>>19517942
there's nothing transcendental about autogynephilia

>> No.19519724

>>19518590
But current mainstream beliefs aren't the most sensible.

>> No.19519787

>>19519724
They are the most "sensible" views insofar as there's no societal or reputational cost (especially as a public figure) for aligning with them.

>> No.19519817

>>19517218
10/10 bait, you sound just like the real thing. Here's your (you).

>> No.19520484

Because being a critical thinker and being a contrarian are two different things.

>> No.19520488

>>19517211
>LGBT acceptance
Start with the Greeks

>> No.19520493

>>19517218
Yikes moment.

>> No.19520502

>>19517211
Because 4chan is full of retards who think espoused opinions are the same as how people act behind close doors. John Lennon was a wife beating anti-semite. Do you really believe Kurt Cobain never said the word nigger? It's all bullshit to remain in the publics good graces.

>> No.19520552

>adjunct for 20 years
>son is a tranny
>divorcee
>fat
>new wife is fat
>angers issues

>> No.19520590

>>19517364
>> “For that some should rule and others be ruled is a thing not only necessary, but expedient; from the hour of their birth, some are marked out for subjection, others for rule...”
Nowhere in these lines does he mention race. Was slavery in Ancient Greece even on racial lines?

>> No.19520621

>>19520552
So how do people know his son is a tranny? I tried googling it and taking a glimpse at his Twitter but I couldn't find much.

>> No.19520626

>>19517364
Obvious bait is obvious

>> No.19520636

>>19519724
Something being mainstream or not has no bearing on it being correct. An idea can be fringe and correct. An idea can be mainstream and correct.

>> No.19520668

>>19520621
It was on his twitter a while back. Trying doing an advanced search

>> No.19520669

>>19517364
He was right though, we just call it the underclass today. They're basically human cattle.

>> No.19520698

>>19520621
He had a tweet about using proper pronouns

>> No.19520741

>>19519722
>there's nothing transcendental about trying to transcend humanity and achieve a state of ethereal eunuchness
This has literally been the goal of Christianity from the start, anon. That's the ENTIRE POINT of Christianity: getting out of the state of sin. You're going to throw a fit because you think that "transcendent" means "higher" rather than "discretely stepping over a boundary to surpass some prior state", but consider this: this is literally the point of transhumanism.

The only argument is you're materially castrating yourself to achieve the divine union of Adam and Eve as a pure being created in the image of Yahweh, or if you're only spiritually castrating yourself to achieve it.

>> No.19521091

>>19517211
READING DOESN'T GIVE WISDOM
NERDS

>> No.19521237

>>19520741
Except it isn't stepping over a boundary, it's just another fetish. Liking footjobs isn't transcendental, either.

>> No.19521240

>>19520636
that's true, and current mainstream beliefs are incorrect

>> No.19521292

>>19521240
Any mainstream belief? How are you defining mainstream? If mainstream just means commonly held, then there are different mainstream beliefs depending on what society you are in. There is no one singular set of mainstream beliefs everywhere. What is mainstream in America certainly isn't exactly the same as what is in China. So it's a strange and vague statement to say current mainstream beliefs are incorrect.

>> No.19521387

>>19521237
>footjobs isn't transcendental
Have you ever gotten a footjob? Like a really good one?

>> No.19521413

>>19517211

You have to play the game to be successful in this world. So yes, it's because he is an academic

>> No.19521419
File: 68 KB, 800x627, Guardian-of-the-Universe.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
19521419

>>19521413
Why is it such a shit game anon?

>> No.19522242

>>19517364
Yeah he said that about central asians. He said northern europeans were too retarded for society.

>> No.19522451

>>19520552
In AMAs he now refers to his two daughters when asked about family shit. He has two kids and one of them used to be his son.

>> No.19522454

>>19522451
Meant for >>19520621

>> No.19522514

>>19517211

You know, 4chan contrarianism is frequently wrong.

>> No.19522610

>>19517364
It's racist to assume this was racist.

>> No.19522631

>>19517211
>How can one read and study as much as Dr Sadler has yet still hold the same political and religious views that are widely accepted in the current milieu?
Because these things always come down to belief. Being smart and well-read doesn't mean you're right. It just means you've got a deeper toolbox with which you can justify your beliefs. Nobody who ever lived is purely rational. We all have some axiomatic beliefs lurking at the bottom of all those layers of logic and rationale. You've got them too.

>> No.19522634

>>19517218
>petty bourgeoisie
do Americans really?

>> No.19522638

>>19522514
Only to normalfags and npc’s. I rest my case.

>> No.19522660

>>19517211
You say this like it's uncommon or something. Following Occam's Razor you'd just say it's a simple case of every day bias. People read into things what they want. It might not be the full story but in the majority of cases I think it covers the basic premise.

>> No.19522683

>>19518619
>>19519558
Lmao, I remember reading Sophie’s world in high school and they did this shit every time Sophie and her mentor would talk to one another and it drove me fucking crazy. Her mentor would say a huge wall of text and then Sophie would respond something like “huh that’s true” or “go on” in between the ranting. It’s only recently that I actually went and read in full the philosophy content that they were talking about and I realized the dialogue was just parodying the original version. It almost ruins the content for me now whenever I read anything Socrates or Plato related.

>> No.19522932

>>19517211

He is just a typical soulless academic. Nothing ever reaches any deeper than his rational mind, no transformation of values or habits happens.

>> No.19522953

>>19517211
He does consulting he has to be PC to get jobs

>> No.19523076

>>19517211
Greg Sneedler doesn't read and study for himself but rather as part of fitting into his social circle. He's not in it for the enrichment of his soul but rather the clout. His self-esteem is dependent on it. That's why he chimps out when people don't call him a doctor, and why he leaves snarky shitty replies to YouTube comments. He hates being reminded that he's just a slob like any uneducated schmoe you pull off the street. Not being taken seriously as what he envisions is the model of high society respected academic is an existential threat to his self-worth and identity.

>> No.19523079

>>19517211
He's a mediocre careerist. This kind of person will spout whatever the party line is.

>> No.19523323

>>19517211
Te-type people(at least immature Te-users) follow whichever opinion that is prevalent. You see this in the field of history which is crowded with source and foonote types. The great philosophers were all Ti-users, as philosophy is Ti field which prioritizes going against groupthink. Which is why Sadler is doomed to obscurity, because he, in all his reading, has never for once, claimed a philosophy of his own.

>> No.19523382

>>19517211
Money

>> No.19523448

>>19517211
Because most of the widespread ideas in human history are right in some kind of way and make sense. Its up to the individual to decide which one to follow

>> No.19523461

>>19523448
No, it's up to the retard to figure out which one to follow. It's up to the fully cogent, independently minded individual to figure out the best synthesis of them all for a specific point in time.

>> No.19523467

>>19523461
yes, you said it better than me

>> No.19523485
File: 33 KB, 480x314, vEdystU5OVHKjdjb8jlQ-1W-uGWdqGbbkThn0-6lHFc[1].jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
19523485

>>19523076
>why he leaves snarky shitty replies to YouTube comments.
yeah, what's up with that? boomer just don't reply you don't have to

>> No.19523512

>>19517218
seriously though, how does a libertarian government prevent someone like Amazon from usurping them and just reinstating capitalism

>> No.19523530

A few years ago during one of his AMA's somebody asked for a good introduction to Aquinas. In the chat I told them to check out the Compendium of Theology by Aquinas and when Sadler saw it he just declared that Aquinas never wrote a book by that name. Not only was he wrong, which is okay, but he was a dick about it. I see him for what he really is after that. He's a boomer and nothing will change that.

>> No.19523564

>>19517942
Based analysis.
I saw this archetype you describes multiple times come to think of it now.
t. first guy you responded to

>> No.19523589

>>19520502
>Kurt Cobain
Kurt was the prototypical shitlib, he wore dresses and advocated for women’s rights before it was popular

>> No.19523608

>>19523589
As if "woman's rights" wasn't popular. Go ahead and tell us more, guy who was clearly born in the 90's.

>> No.19523621

>>19517211
>Bro why does this university employed person have super palatable views?
HMMMM

>> No.19523623

>>19523608
Well not to the same level it is now

>> No.19523634

>>19517211
People even at PHD levels follow a socially pressured American habit of compartmentalizing politics from the rest of their brain. They treat it like a set of spoons you buy at walmart, an ideology toolkit and you pick your team. This is of course abhorrent and retarded behavior but an interesting reality of the modern day where people who have studied for decades have the same opinions as illiterate TV watching peasants. A true indication of the dark age we inhabit.

>> No.19523642

>>19523623
Yeah, walk it back. You don't know what the fuck you're talking about. "Political correctness" was coined in the late 80's and early 90's for a reason. How are you so confident in making these statements when you weren't even alive?

>> No.19523780

>>19523512
>libertarian government
Is this a contradiction?

>> No.19524542

>>19517211
someone post the video of him passive-aggressively seething about receiving feedback on his videos

>> No.19524552
File: 21 KB, 376x376, 3C3E879A-756B-410C-9FE5-4CFDAFEB7363.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
19524552

>is a catholic
>son is a troon
God must hate him

>> No.19524557

>>19523634
I don't think you know him from a few tweets. He even says he used to be a fascist in highschool in videos and I have spoken to him, and he is definitely not a shitlib.

>> No.19524568

I don't care if this guy is a tranny loving libtard, but this fat fuck better finish his Hegel series before he dies.

>> No.19524625

>>19524568
Is the Hegel series it any better than his regular way of reading out lengthy quotes and repeating what he just read on the most surface level? All while avoiding any overarching synthesis and chancing any kind of meaningful interpretation?

I speed read Nietzsche's Genealogy of Morals with little attention and then watched his videos on it, hoping to patch up my crappy treatment of the work. I learned absolutely nothing new.

>> No.19524639

>>19524542
Which one? It's a whole series.

>> No.19524705

>>19517420

You will never fuck a woman

>> No.19524764

>>19524625
He's taking the book literally sentence by sentence. He started in 2014 or something and he still has like a quarter of the book to go.

>> No.19525966

>>19524764
yeah, but is it worth it for those who can read at a high school level? does he add any value to it whatsoever?

>> No.19526435

Have you considered that extensive reading actually leads to that position rather run away from it?

>> No.19527490

>>19517218
jannies please ban all pol tards who reply to this post thanks

>> No.19528781

>>19523589
>advocated for women’s rights before it was popular
>before it was popular
take notice folks, these are the people determining the current political mood on 4chin.15 year old retards that think women's rights had yet to become a popular issue in the 1990s. 70 years after women's suffrage and well into third wave of feminism and when "girl power" was literally everywhere.

>> No.19528824

>>19517218
The first economic ponzi scheme is the sex monopoly; one gender exists to withhold and grant sex (a basic need) to those who conform to their economic desires. Typically embodied in a way where the seed producer will want as much sex as possible for as little cost as possible, but the eggbearer also selling as little sex as possible for as much as possible. The worst appearance has been Onlyfans and Twitter, where mere allusions of sex - or complete denial of sex has been monetized; the desire to give money to the ponzi scheme for zero sex has been fetishized. Capitalism (the woman) has won. In the short term.

Naturally, the proletariat scum of this story, organized into Unions (States, Tribes, Houses) to ensure that they were all given some pay for their work, and it would not just be a trickle up economy for the ponzi scheme.

>> No.19530774

>>19523642
>Gen X wanna-boomer lashes out for 45th time today

>> No.19531012

>>19530774
it's not his fault zoomers are so retarded they think women's rights had yet to catch on in the 1990s