[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports / report a bug ] [ 4plebs / archived.moe / rbt ]

2022-11: Warosu is now out of maintenance. Become a Patron!

/lit/ - Literature


View post   
View page     

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
File: 265 KB, 798x1200, Edelman-Break-up-Letters-By-Philosophers-798.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
20488635 No.20488635 [Reply] [Original]

He plagiarized almost everything he wrote
>Philosophers believing their subjective observations to be true - from Spinoza
>Morality being cringe and radical individualism - from Stirner
>Will to power - from Hobbes
>Rejection of rationalism - Schopenhauer
>Feel free to add any other ideas he stole
How is he original again?

>> No.20488670

>>20488635
Sometimes he literally plagiarized too. There’s a line in Genealogy of Morality about how “the doctors who look after the sick must be sick themselves” that’s lifted straight from Plato’s Republic.

>> No.20488747

>>20488635
uh, lol

>> No.20488847

>>20488635
Idiot.

>> No.20488968

>>20488635
I was surprised when I realized how much he lifted from Emerson. I still love both though

>> No.20488975

>>20488635
Oh no I hope the people whose ideas he was in dialogue with don't sue him for copyright. Did Plato have the license to publish Socrates? When Augustine quotes the Bible can he get in trouble with Moses?

>> No.20488992

>>20488635
>God is dead - from Mainländer

>> No.20489012

>>20488635
Philosophy is essentially about themes and slogans. That's the best that thought can hope to achieve, just a cool little motif like 'rejection of rationalism' that makes you go, 'very cool! i support/oppose this theme!'

Twentieth-century continental philosophy, with its denigration of the text as irrelevant filler that's just there to convey the Central Message in the form of a nicely padded-out book, has fully vindicated this position.

>> No.20489061

came to /lit/ again and swiftly remembered that you're all a bunch of simple minded morons

>> No.20489065 [DELETED] 

>>20488635
When you study the cultural and intellectual context of any thinker, or even scientists, you realize that what so-called original thinkers do is that they take various ideas that are already in the culture, digest it and give it back to the culture in a more synthesized, systematic, insightful or just new way. You can notice that Freud for example is doing Nietzche in his own way, etc. The culture recognizes in the thinker what it already believes in a more disperse, intuitive way, and accepts it (because he is saying what it wants to say but with better words, so to speak). It’s only later, when that cultural Zeitgeist/context has faded away that so-called original thinkers appear so original and to come seemingly out of nowhere. I’m doing this study with Hegel right now and it’s amazing how much Hegel makes sense and does not seem original AT ALL in the light of the Frühromantikers (same for Schelling btw).

>> No.20489090

>>20488635
When you study the cultural and intellectual context of any thinker, or even scientists, you realize that what so-called original thinkers do is that they take various ideas that are already in the culture, digest them and give them back to the culture in a more synthesized, systematic, insightful or just new way. You can notice that Freud for example is doing Nietzche in his own way, etc. The culture recognizes in the thinker what it already believes in a more disperse, intuitive way, and accepts it (because he is saying what it wants to say but with better words, so to speak). It’s only later, when that cultural Zeitgeist/context has faded away that so-called original thinkers appear so original and to come seemingly out of nowhere. I’m doing this study with Hegel right now and it’s amazing how much Hegel makes sense and does not seem original AT ALL in the light of the Frühromantikers (same for Schelling btw).

>> No.20490572

>>20489090
>Frühromantikers
would would you add an S to the end of this German word when its plural form is just "Frühromantiker?"

>> No.20490591

>>20489061
i'm going to rape you

>> No.20490593

>>20488635
Is not philosophy about arguing about what other philosophers said, input something new based on other philosophers idea and so quoting them, etc?

>> No.20490664

>>20488635
>Philosophers believing their subjective observations to be true - from Spinoza
I'm sure Spinoza was not the first one to remark about so common an accusation as this one

>Morality being cringe and radical individualism
One kind of morality is cringe to Nietzsche, not the virtú nor the heroic, aristocratic one of Greeks; and Nietzsche was not for radical individualism, he was for a great individual, he never preached individuality to the individuals composing the masses (they are not individuals)

>Will to power - from Hobbes
Haven't read much Hobbes, so can't say anything particularly on him, but Nietzsche's Will to power is quite complex and is exposed in rather detailed paragraphs in his notes

>Rejection of rationalism - Schopenhauer
rejection of rationalism is not an idea passive of being plagiarized, but Schopenhauer indeed was an influence on Nietzsche, but just not the only one, have you read Heraclitus, tragedies?

But essentially this anon here >>20489090 is very accurate when it comes to the history of ideas in the philosophical tradition, there are some sparks of geniuses coming with new and original ideas, but there is likewise a spark of genius when a philosopher manages to present some ideas in a much more pertinent, clear, succint and beautiful way.

>> No.20490686

>>20490572
Because americans can't into another language.

>> No.20490797
File: 46 KB, 700x641, 38 (2).jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
20490797

I hate Nietzsche threads so much, bros

>> No.20490955

>>20488635
So you're saying compilers are better than creators?

>> No.20491007

>>20488635
>He plagiarized almost everything he wrote
Same with Plato, but I don't see people complaining about him doing it.

>> No.20492138

>>20488635
He plagiarised a lot of his criticism of Christianity from David Hume.

>> No.20492252
File: 15 KB, 700x700, i4.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
20492252

>>20488635
Philosophers literally plagiarise each other all the time

>> No.20492550

>>20488635
Eternal recurrence - Upanishads

>> No.20492906

>>20490572
Weil er Englisch spricht und ein Fremdwort pluralisiert hat du Klugscheisser. "Why would you?.." Du weisst genau wieso also wieso fragst du?

>> No.20493366

>>20488635
>>Morality being cringe and radical individualism - from Stirner
wrong
>>Will to power - from Hobbes
wrong

>> No.20493413
File: 213 KB, 800x1202, 800px-Nietzsche187c.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
20493413

>>20488635
What work of Hobbes contains Nietzsche's will to power? I've read Leviathan, and that has nothing to do with it.

>> No.20493712

>>20493413
Part 1, chapter 8 says that power is the true motivation for all actions

>> No.20493838

>>20489012
>Twentieth-century continental philosophy, with its denigration of the text as irrelevant filler that's just there to convey the Central Message in the form of a nicely padded-out book
I… what the fuck?
That’s as far away from the thinking of Derrida/Heidegger/Foucault/Baudrillard/etc as you can possibly get

>> No.20493847

>>20489090
>The culture recognizes in the thinker what it already believes in a more disperse, intuitive way
“Books can only teach you what you already know” - Nietzsche

>> No.20494397

>>20488635
>Rejection of rationalism
>Schopenhauer
Just how /lit/ has fallen

>> No.20494693

>>20493838
Lmao. Alright. When you're done reading your little Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy webpages, how about you actually look at some of the original sources? I opened a page of Blanchot literally at random:
>In the opening of the work's space that is spaceless, that takes without return or possibility of beginning the voice that sacrifices its being to the ceaseless forgetting, and that claims without the guarantee of Law that which is beyond all Law, there is very little of interest.

>> No.20495031

>>20492550
Nietzsche's conception of the eternal recurrence is not at all similar to that of the Upanishads, or any other texts regarding the Vedanta.

>> No.20495223
File: 112 KB, 540x675, 7d9f4c4e593e55c5eb2f96b0b90db583_scaled.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
20495223

>>20488635
>White people done stole that
And? What's new? Literally every good idea in white culture was stoled from a Black woman at some point.
>>believing their subjective observations to be true
Africans have known this since the dawn of thought. Y'all frail lil white boys had to be the ones to use numbers and shit to keep track a stuff. Because y'all's lil brains just couldn't handle concepts of such magnitude!
>>Morality being cringe
Actually morality being cringe was invented by us, honey. Nietzsche just made it something y'all lil white boys could handle (he took out all the spice). Just look at the streets of your countries, with us Black folks runnin' them and shit. Your cops need all the help they can get just to inflict your petty morality on a single Black man. We own this shit.
>>Rejection of rationalism
Again, this idea was invented by us Black folks. You white boys have always been the cringe rational ones. It wasn't until the powerful Black woman came along until you decided an intuitional approach to life was worth further investigation (if your little neanderthal white boy brains could even conceive of something definitionally approximate to "investigation").

>> No.20495616

>>20495223
Now that’s an old meme paying a visit

>> No.20495950

>>20488975
In an ideal world, yes. Those words are intellectual property and their owners ought to be compensated.

>> No.20496347 [SPOILER] 
File: 59 KB, 500x500, 2018-02-16 19.50.50.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
20496347

>>20490591
*rapes you back*

>> No.20496380

>>20488975
>When Augustine quotes the Bible can he get in trouble with Moses?
I want this to happen but I'm unsure if pay per view exists in afterlife

>> No.20496708

>>20492906
Okay aber trotzdem kommt es mir außergewöhnlich prätentiös vor, ein Fremdwort zu benutzen, wenn es ein derartiges Wort schon im Englischen gibt.

>> No.20496745
File: 23 KB, 739x415, 1649331099318.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
20496745

>>20490797
Came to post this

Nietzsche is the most overrated retard I've ever read. He's only popular cuz "muh edgy anti Christianity". He's burning in hell

>> No.20496869

>>20496745
>burning in hell
keep seething volcano boy

>> No.20497013

>>20496745
>...I've ever read
No you didn't. Summarize a chapter in any of his works right now you dumb gigachadposter nigger.

>> No.20497055
File: 500 KB, 1600x1317, 1642284874114.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
20497055

>>20488635
>>Rejection of rationalism - Schopenhauer

>> No.20497061

>>20497013
Sure

>hurry durr God isn't real cuz no woman will mate with me, not because I'm an insufferable twat

>> No.20497078

>>20497061
What book?

>> No.20497088

>>20488635
Philosopher's are inspired by each other wow!! what an observation OP
Not like the history of philosophy is a history of discourse
Moreover all your examples are themselves arguably derivative, if you're going to be that much of a sticker then;
Say, how the fuck is
>Philosophers believing their subjective observations to be true
Uniquely Spinozan? Is Spinoza a plagiarist because a similar estimation of subjectivity and perspective features heavily in Protagoras?
Or how is
>Morality being cringe and radical individualism
Stirner's own? Have you not read the Republic OP, Thrasymachus appears in the first book. Stirner considers the ego to refer only to itself and cannot be graded against any values. Nietzsche wrote that he '[found] abominable any decadent spirit who says: 'Everything only to me!' Doesn't seem like he thought much of Stirner
Or, How the fuck does Hobbes' political
>"will to power"
even approach the metaphysical Will to Power of Nietzsche's notebooks. Hobbes thought of power as emanating from a juridical sovereign, Nietzsche appreciated the productivity of power where Hobbes considered it simply a zero-sum game

How the fuck is
>rejection of rationalism
uniquely Schopenhauerian? Wasn't Plato's rationalism already opposed in its time too by the Sophists, and all throughout history

>> No.20497098

Wtp is just Heravlitean flux. N specifically notes Pythagoras as source of er in Untimely Meds.

>> No.20497099

>>20496745
Jesus is an overrated pacifist faggot and the Jewish hell doesn't exist.

>> No.20497115

>>20493712
>power is the motivation of for actions
is not the same as
>metaphysically everything is power
dumbass

>> No.20497117

>>20497061
>Your brain on christcuckery
Why are you even here if the only book you read is the Bible?

>> No.20497120

>>20493712
Part I, Chap. VIII is "Of the Vertues commonly called Intellectual; and their contray Defects." Where is it in there, anon?

>> No.20497420

>>20497099
basado

>> No.20497731

>>20488635
No, just no.

>> No.20497742

>>20488992
>All divine essence returns back into this comic consciousness, or it is the complete self-relinquishing of substance. In contrast, the unhappy consciousness is conversely the tragic fate of the certainty of itself that is supposed to be in and for itself. It is the consciousness of the loss of all essentiality in this certainty of itself and of the loss even of this knowing of itself – It is the loss of substance as well as of the self, the pain that expresses itself in the harsh phrase that God is dead.

>>
Delete posts
Password [?]Password used for file deletion.
Captcha
Action