[ 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: 606 KB, 651x1093, 7A48BDBE-BBDE-438B-BAE6-647D6620D68B.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
21494641 No.21494641 [Reply] [Original]

>“There are philosophers who have repudiated the goal of truth -- Nietzsche, for example, who argued that there are no truths, only interpretations. But you need only ask yourself whether what Nietzsche says is true, to realize how paradoxical it is. (If it is true, then it is false! -- an instance of the so-called 'liar' paradox.) Likewise, the French philosopher Michel Foucault repeatedly argues as though the 'truth' of an epoch has no authority outside of the power-structure that endorses it. There is no trans-historical truth about the human condition. But again, we should ask ourselves whether that last statement is true: for if it is true, it is false. There has arisen among modernist philosophers a certain paradoxism which has served to put them out of communication with those of their contemporaries who are merely modern. A writer who says that there are no truths, or that all truth is "merely relative," is asking you not to believe him. So don't.”
Roger Scruton.

How can we really take Nietzsche seriously?

>> No.21494647

>>21494641
The Tales of the Mighty Dead

>> No.21494648

>>21494641
>If it is true, then it is false! -- an instance of the so-called 'liar' paradox
Smug_Soyjak.jpg

>> No.21494657

>>21494641
Classical “if nothing is true, how do you know that? heh” Reddit christcuck npc gotcha
Also, who the fuck is Roger Scruton?

>> No.21494663

>>21494648
>>21494657
Not an argument.

>> No.21494713
File: 7 KB, 199x253, CADC61DC-492A-44D9-85CF-2F7E12996369.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
21494713

Nietzsche is a wit and Scruton is the middest of mids

>> No.21494728

FUCK LIBERALS

>> No.21494752

>>21494641
Scruton again proving himself a midwit with opinions on everything and insight into nothing. There can very well be truths within a system of values, of axioms that are taken as self-evident, certainties of a particular age etc. And there are different categories of truth, ie scientific (and even the sciences change frameworks over time) or purely logical true statements or truths 'about the human condition', while both that condition and its interpretations change in different epochs. Nietzsche pointed out how le Big Truths are constructed, not that there is no logic to the world.
Lots of big words supposed to inspire awe, but in the end it's just a reddit-tier gotcha as >>21494657
points out.

>> No.21494864

>>21494752
/thread

>> No.21494881

>>21494752
How come most persons who write generic histories of philosophy always badmouth Nietzsche so much? Scruton, Durant, Russell, the list could go on.

>> No.21494896

>>21494657
By communicating, Nietzsche is engaging in the dialectic which refutes himself. It's like trying to prove genetics is completely wrong by doing genetics.

>> No.21494901

>>21494881
Nietzsche challenges the post Christian worldview these men belong to and feel a sort of patronizing delight in belonging to having “figured it all out”. Nietzsche says but what if you are just taking most of the old order for granted and you’re afraid to overthrow it except cosmetically? What if you haven’t actually solved anything but have only buried your head in the sand further?

>> No.21494913

>>21494881
Nietzsche writes explicitly against philosophy in so many of his books, I'm guessing that those authors took offense. You can't really compile a book with all of history's philosophers and then put Nietzsche in it and expect his chapter to be positive.

>> No.21494921

>>21494896
read >>21494752