This line literally disproves Marxism philosophically

[Anonymous No.20657498]

And proves that philosophy should focus on capitalism & liberal democracy & phenomenology in the modern world, which is what Foucault, Fukuyama, Lacan, Shinzo Abe, Mark Fisher and others tried to preach

Approach this line from the Critical Theory and learn how to create a pro-capitalist Critical Theory that abolishes the life-denying concept of Marxism

[Anonymous No.20657531]

The scientific explanation why Marx was wrong. He argued for a pseudo-science, i.e. a practice of the (pseudo) "scientific" method which he called historical materialism but which bore no empirical truth

The problematic with unfalsifiability of pseudoscience is that pseudoscience fundamentally remains just speculation without empirical confirmation and is thus scientifically useless. In this context, isn't all of philosophy useless?

No. What we need to make philosophy more scientific is to create a philosophical framework for psychoanalysis which really is just a recognition of Nietzsche's (and Hegel's!) efforts as scientific in practice, and not purely philosophical. In short, one needs to recognize the scientific Truth in Nietzsche's writings: that there is some form of objective Truth in the first place. Otherwise, Nietzsche's rules for life look like this:
>identify "the rules"
>break them

So how does the philosophical ubermensch Nietzsche approach objective good philosophically? He was basically a utilitarianist but also rejector of ethnic nationalism. But he was not necessarily against civic nationalism, and the echoes of (German) idealism remained in him despite his rejection of the German nationality.

So in this sense objective good can be defined as pseudo-objective, which can be defined using 2 assumptions:
>life is inherently different from non-life
>intelligent life is inherently different from non-intelligent life
>intelligent life is described as the capacity to carry abstract thought
and then from this we deduce that there is a form of (pseudo) objective good, which is a mixture of human own abstract thinking & existential crisis. but which does not apply to the rest of the animal world. also, the questions of sex & love & hope are fundamental for a modern critical theory

in short, Marx was wrong because he was life-denying in the Nietzschean sense. that's why he had barely any friends as a person. his ideology was a reaction to his friendlessness and solitude/loneliness, all of which coincided with poverty and thus was ripe grounds for own frustration. hence Marx's writings on the Jew and women. People want to associate themselves, ultimately, with a life-affirming ideology, not a life-denying one

[Anonymous No.20657558]

>>20657531
marx had more friends than nietzsche
how do you square that?

[Anonymous No.20657563]

Still don’t understand if Deleuze was socialist or not.

[Anonymous No.20658051]

>>20657498
Karl marx was a literary landlord:
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3948861

>This essay describes Karl Marx's assertion of copyright and plagiarism claims, as well as his responses to plagiarism accusations. It observes that Marx claimed private ownership of the economic and literary value of his works and ideas, and reflects on whether that decision was consistent with the communist ideals he described.

[Anonymous No.20658157]

>>20658051
>keyword: trolling
Nice try.

[Anonymous No.20658183]

As for me? I pirate my animu and mango regardless of whether or not official channels exist and how good or poor they may or may not be.

[Anonymous No.20658187]

>>20657531
every rich person knows magic is real

all materialists should be hanged

[Anonymous No.20658195]

>>20657531
you have a incredibly superficial understanding of philosophy. go back and read Plato, Kant, and Hegel before commenting on what Marx and Nietzsche got right.

[Anonymous No.20658621]

>>20657498
start with the greeks and will understand