/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.23076700]

Which is the greatest thinker of the 21st century?

[Anonymous No.23076707]

>>23076700
define thinker

[Anonymous No.23076710]

[Anonymous No.23076715]

>>23076700
their synthesis

[Anonymous No.23076718]

>>23076710
I just wish he wasn't so fucking insufferable as a person. Both reading his shit and listening to him is like descending into reddit hell

[Anonymous No.23076731]

>>23076700
Neither Zizek nor Peterson are of the 21st century anon.

>>23076710
He's just a sock puppet for Nick Land's derranged fantasies.

[Anonymous No.23076753]

>>23076731
Sure and Heidegger was a 19th century thinker.

[Anonymous No.23076779]

>>23076753
Heidegger mostly wrote during the 20th century and was active until the 60s. Zizek has been recycling the same work he wrote in the early 90s. Peterson's just the academic equivalent of Chris Chan. Actually he's worse because Peterson is rambles random shit he read on wikipedia and has zero creativity.

Who are the most influential who actually wrote in the 21st century? Land, Fisher, and Han are candidates. Out of these, Fisher is the most well known but objectively the worst.

[Anonymous No.23076790]

>>23076779
Mr.Beast

[Anonymous No.23076856]

>>23076779
>Land, Fisher, and Han are candidates
It's hilarious that you would trash Peterson and Zizek but cite those utter pseuds. They all belong in the same group of float-up mediocrities, but at least Zizek is genuinely well-educated

[Anonymous No.23076882]

Peterson says some decent things when it come so psychology and self-actualization. But then anything outside of that and he's a literal nutter.

Zizek is fucking annoying, because he latches onto any random new hot topic and spins it into a very convoluted thesis that leaves the audience drying themselves after being covered with all his spit. The only thing I got out of him is that all ideology is problematic.

[Anonymous No.23076893]

>>23076700
JK Rowling and Ben Shapiro.

[Anonymous No.23076908]

>>23076882
Zizek is to be read

[Anonymous No.23076910]

I have a feeling that its someone none of you know about and will only be reevaluated 30 years down the line.

[Anonymous No.23076941]

>>23076779
No

[Anonymous No.23077147]

>>23076731
>He's just a sock puppet for Nick Land's derranged fantasies.
Wow you are stupid

[Anonymous No.23077175]

>>23076700
This is like apples verses onions for a fruit salad. Peterson’s a pseud.

[Anonymous No.23077461]

>>23076700
Certainly not those guys but Agamben

[Anonymous No.23077743]

>>23076700
Zizek. Clean your penis either way though.

[Anonymous No.23077760]

i wouldn't class Peterson as a "thinker" and zizek is a tad over-rated.

[Anonymous No.23078242]

Noam Chomsky

[Anonymous No.23078273]

>>23076710
He is so easy to own that he doesn’t even show his face out anymore

[Anonymous No.23078281]

Gruppo di Nun

[Anonymous No.23078283]

>>23078273
This packed audience in LA doesn't count?

[Anonymous No.23078292]

>>23078283
No it doesnt count because the only people willing to pay a ticket are people who like him.

I used to see him around, he used to come at my parties and do my coke, I was friends w his tranny gf when they were still a secret and he was married. I used to ask him questions, I knew he didn’t know how to answer them, he would get embarrassed.

Anyway he stopped showing up, now all he does is his little balls to talk about his dumb shitty Shakespeare theories.

[Anonymous No.23078293]

>>23076707
Define define

[Anonymous No.23078295]

>>23078283
Also let’s be serious: this guy defends monarchies

[Anonymous No.23078329]

>>23078292
>No it doesnt count because the only people willing to pay a ticket are people who like him.
Isn’t that the purpose of a public platform?

[Anonymous No.23078332]

>>23078295
Show me the fruits of the French Revolution then

[Anonymous No.23078337]

Brandon Sanderson and Sarah J. Maas

[Anonymous No.23078353]

>>23076700

[Anonymous No.23078364]

bedeviled eggs!

>>23078353
He does make some good points, doe. Speed is the name of the game now. You can spend 2 years writing an extremely high quality book, and you'll almost certainly be outcompeted by someone that wrote 5 slop-books in the same time span

[Anonymous No.23078386]

>>23078332
Foremost it served as a check against monarchic decadence. More broadly it lead to the rise of meritocracy through its egalitarian ideals and Napoleon as a leader, rule of law through the Napoleonic Code, and later with the Springtime of Nations.

Monarchy as practiced by some of the ancient Romans wouldn't be so bad. They would adopt an excellent man into their family as their heir which makes much more sense. Though that is basically oligarchic republicanism. In reality, men aren't rational and prefer their own kin, however suboptimal and flawed their sons obviously are. Monarchy reverts to the mean and hands supreme power to some mediocre shithead.

[Anonymous No.23078399]

>>23078332
Aristocrats have been paying taxes since.
An incredibly good university system not only in France but also in Italy that promoted universal education — Enrico fermi went to La scuola normale founded by Napoleon, so l’ecole normale and the college de France were born from it (and don’t tell me that’s bad or ill just call you a pleb)

The creation of the modern state in southern Europe which rise from poverty 70% of the European population.

My family were peasants during the French Revolution and thank to it they became an upper middle class family for 200 years.

[Anonymous No.23078401]

>>23076700
Peterson is a conservative pundit who writes books pretending to be an intellectual

[Anonymous No.23078424]

>>23076700
Me

[Anonymous No.23078466]

>>23078364
Yeah, that. And a hundred more, too.

[Anonymous No.23078474]

Jordan Peterson is a huge fraud, if you were gonna include him then might as well include PewDiePie, Mr. Beast and Sneako.

[Anonymous No.23078482]

>>23078474
>Sneako
Unironically this. Sneako has done more for public thought and discourse than anyone mentioned in this thread.

[Anonymous No.23078489]

>>23076700
We could train a chatbot on /lit/ posts and it would come out a better thinker than peterson. Zizek might have it beat on coherence, however.

[Anonymous No.23078503]

>>23078474
Peterson has good points about a lot of shit. He basically distills traditional wisdom for a new age. In terms of credentials he was a majorly popular professor at the University of Toronto, and is a licensed clinician. I don't know what you mean by fraud, but I assume you would also be a fraud by such a standard.

Even pewdiepie tries to read books and share some wisdom with his retard subscribers. I don't know about the others.

It's easy to tear things down. Much more difficult to build things up.

[Anonymous No.23078506]

>>23078474
sneako is very intelligent tho

[Anonymous No.23078529]

>>23078506
Mutts gotta rep their best in show.

[Anonymous No.23078679]

[Anonymous No.23078963]

>>23078482
Who is that? What has he done?
>inb4 look him up
no

[Anonymous No.23078993]

>>23076700
Stefan Molyneux

[Anonymous No.23079001]

R. Scott Bakker and it isn't even close.

[Anonymous No.23079009]

>>23079001
Sneako would body this pseud in a debate

[Anonymous No.23079010]

>>23078506
how do you get cucked intelligently tho

[Anonymous No.23079041]

>>23078993
checked

[Anonymous No.23079044]

>>23076908
Can confirm. Please don't lie in Zizek's lap while he's spitting straight fax on ideology.

[Anonymous No.23079056]

>>23078386
Nooo! Intelligence is not an inheritable trait! Even if you're extremely intelligent your sons might be randomly born full retards!
>>23078399
Billions must die so I can rise from serf to middle class. Class systems are based as well, just the class systems that fit me.

[Anonymous No.23079068]

>>23079056
Awww u mad about Robespierre because he had some degenerates' heads choppy-chopped off?

[Anonymous No.23079073]

>>23079068
Revolution is slave morality.

[Anonymous No.23079131]

>>23079073

[Anonymous No.23079156]

>>23078963
If you don't already know him then you probably aren't intelligent enough to understand

[Anonymous No.23079166]

Rudyard Lynch.

[Anonymous No.23079189]

>>23076893
>Ben Shapiro
The only thing this k*ke knows is to perplex and confuse people into agreeing with him.

>>23076779
>Peterson is rambles random shit he read on wikipedia and has zero creativity.
This.

[Anonymous No.23079196]

>>23079156
sounds like you're not intelligent enough to explain

[Anonymous No.23079197]

>>23079131
I accept your concession.

[Anonymous No.23079201]

>>23079197

[Anonymous No.23079219]

>>23076700
Libido Kamen.

[Anonymous No.23079254]

>>23078474
Calling him a fraud would be going too far. The fact that you don't like him doesn't mean that he's a fraud. He might be wrong, have controversial takes on some things, but he's educated and used to teach at Harvard and other highly regarded universities. Though yeah, his life advice and philosophy is pretty fucking generic, wouldn't call him a great thinker.
>>23076893
>Ben Shapiro
Yeah, that's it. Undoubtedly he has mastered the technical part of the art of debating, he knows how to talk fast and ask questions that require some talk and can't be explained in a couple of sentences, and the moment the target gets confused he just gets very confident, starts punching with a bunch of buzzwords and "wins".

His debates are all style over substance, they're just entertainment and there's basically nothing of value in there. Also he selectively picks his targets and usually debates people weaker than him.

>J.K. Rowling
Why would she be a fraud? She wrote a couple of good books for teens. Nothing wrong with that. I don't see her trying to be too pseudo-intellectual.

[Anonymous No.23079266]

>>23076882
>leaves the audience drying themselves after being covered with all his spit
I can't tell if he has a lisp or if it's just his accent