[ 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: 27 KB, 250x351, plato[1].jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3926137 No.3926137[DELETED]  [Reply] [Original]

http://selectsmart.com/PHILOSOPHY/

what philosopher are you?

>> No.3926141

I try to model myself on the emperor Marcus Aurelius. I try to control my emotions and endure harsh conditions.

>> No.3926156

>Doesn't matter/Dislike all answer choices
x12

I'm Thomas Aquinas.

Hm, okay then. I do hate these tests.

>> No.3926157

Your top match for Ethical Philosophy Selector is:
Thomas Aquinas
1. Thomas Aquinas (100%)
2. John Stuart Mill (94%)
3. Baruch (later known as Benedictus)
4. Jeremy Bentham (86%)
5. Immanuel Kant (75%)
6. Aristotle (72%)
7. Jean-Paul Sartre (68%)
8. Stoics (62%)
9. St. Augustine (59%)
10. Cynics (57%)
11. Epicureans (57%)
12. Prescriptivism (52%)
13. Nel Noddings (50%)
14. William of Ockham (49%)
15. Ayn Rand (42%)
16. Plato (39%)
17. Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche (37%)
18. Thomas Hobbes (27%)
19. David Hume (26%)

>> No.3926162

>>3926156
Oh, now I got it. The percentages are all 0%, but Aquinas is the first philosopher alphabetically.

>> No.3926167

>>3926162
its on a curve

>> No.3926179

1. Jean-Paul Sartre (100%)
2. Immanuel Kant (81%)
3. John Stuart Mill (75%)

Did I win

>> No.3926181
File: 87 KB, 540x221, omg.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3926181

What.

>> No.3926188

Kant 100%
Sartre 88%
Bentham 87%

>> No.3926191

Kant 100%
Spinoza 95%
Aquinas 85%

>> No.3926199
File: 62 KB, 480x480, Amami, Alfredo, amami quanto t'amo.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3926199

1. John Stuart Mill (100%)
2. Jean-Paul Sartre (99%
3. Immanuel Kant (94%)
4. Jeremy Bentham (89%)
5. Epicureans (84%)
6. Prescriptivism (74%)
7. Ayn Rand (63%)
8. Thomas Aquinas (46%)
9. Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche (43%)
10. Nel Noddings (43%
11. Thomas Hobbes (42%)
12. David Hume (42%)
13. Baruch (later known as Benedictus) Spinoza (42%)
14. Aristotle (40%)
15. William of Ockham (35%)
16. Stoics (31%)
17. St. Augustine (30%)
18. Plato (26%)
19. Cynics (23%)

>> No.3926202

>>3926137
I got 100% for Nietzche and 90% for Hume, with 85% for the cynics, 79% for Hobbes, and 76% for Sartre for my top 5.

>> No.3926205

>>3926137
This test gauges Rationale to be upper-tier with Aesthetics; it is designed by one who does not know Beauty and Marxism.

The test cannot separate the mediums of the average uneducated person, and the abilities of those who have means to accomplish what they want. Sure, on paper, this might sound like Capitalist Rand shit, but by its plebeian gauging of influence and power of the individual, even Oscar Wilde would seem like a Rand fan.

>> No.3926206

Thomas Aquinas (100%)
Stoics (94%)
Aristotle (92%)
Baruch (later known as Benedictus) Spinoza (85%)
Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche (76%)
David Hume (75%)
Cynics (71%)
Epicureans (63%)
Thomas Hobbes (62%)
Plato (59%)
Jean-Paul Sartre (52%)
Nel Noddings (50%)
William of Ockham (49%)
Jeremy Bentham (46%)
St. Augustine (43%)
Ayn Rand (43%)
John Stuart Mill (40%)
Immanuel Kant (33%)
Prescriptivism (11%)

Clearly, the person who created this knows nothing of Aquinas. My views could barely be further from his.

>> No.3926213

>>3926179
are you me? whats the French guy about?

>> No.3926220

To no surprise, I scored as Kant far and away, with Rand being a very distant second.

>> No.3926235
File: 13 KB, 317x426, ethics.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3926235

I don't read philosophy, but it makes sense that I would be matched with the classic liberals. don't know why Aquinas in so high though

>> No.3926239

cynics 100%

cool

>> No.3926240

1. Jean-Paul Sartre (100%)
2. Baruch (later known as Benedictus) Spinoza (91%)
3. Immanuel Kant (77%)
4. Thomas Aquinas (72%)
5. Epicureans (67%)
6. Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche (64%)
7. John Stuart Mill (60%)
8. Jeremy Bentham (58%)
9. Stoics (58%)
10. Aristotle (55%)
11. David Hume (53%)
12. St. Augustine (50%)
13. Nel Noddings (48%)
14. William of Ockham (44%)
15. Plato (33%)
16. Prescriptivism (32%)
17. Thomas Hobbes (32%)
18. Ayn Rand (23%)
19. Cynics (17%)

Pretty new to literature and philosophy, still haven't read any Kant or Benedictus yet.
Sartre seems pretty spot on

>> No.3926244

Ayn Rand (100%)
2. Jean-Paul Sartre (92%)
3. John Stuart Mill (90%)
4. Epicureans (84%)
5. Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche
6. Immanuel Kant (80%)
7. Thomas Aquinas (76%)
8. Baruch (later known as Benedictus) Spinoza (73%)
9. Nel Noddings (71%)
10. Thomas Hobbes (69%)
11. Prescriptivism (67%)
12. William of Ockham (65%)
13. Cynics (59%)
14. Aristotle (55%)
15. Stoics (55%)
16. Jeremy Bentham (53%)
17. David Hume (51%)
18. Plato (46%)
19. St. Augustine (44%)

The fact that Hobbes is anywhere but lowest shows how shoddy a quiz this is.

>> No.3926247

>>3926220
>Kant
I'm sorry.

>> No.3926248

100% Epicureans.
Neat. I thought more people in /lit/ would be like Epicurus.

>> No.3926254

>>3926244
>The fact that Hobbes is anywhere but lowest shows how shoddy a quiz this is.
its just an indicator, and will get people reading, and its just a bit of fun

>> No.3926256

>>3926137
Pure, 100% Kant
Feels good being GOAT philosopher

>> No.3926264

A friendly reminder that if you're less than 50% Plato you are a moron

>> No.3926271

1. Epicureans (100%)
2. Ayn Rand (97%)
3. Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche (90%)

That makes no damn sense with what I put in there.

>> No.3926281
File: 37 KB, 460x451, Screen shot 2013-07-10 at 10.09.56 PM.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3926281

>>3926137
I'm not well versed in philosophy, but this has definitely given me some insight as to which philosophers to look into.

>> No.3926282

>>3926137
Kant (100%)
Sartre (89%)
Bentham (87%)
Mill (86%)
Aquinas (78%)

I call BS. I never liked Aquinas at all, this game is rigged. And Kant was only okay.

>> No.3926287

100% Plato.

>> No.3926288

>>3926264

>Muh morality

>> No.3926294

>>3926287
its on a curve if you cant read, it just means you fit him most on the test, not that you agree with him 100%

>> No.3926298 [SPOILER] 
File: 192 KB, 143x160, kant.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3926298

>>3926282
>Kant
>Ok

Yeah i'm gonna have to ask you to pick one

>> No.3926299

ITT: Plebs who haven't heard and read anything of contemporary Ethics

>> No.3926300
File: 77 KB, 402x402, Charles-Bukowski-9230860-1-402.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3926300

>>3926281
mfw this guy is gonna look into Aquinas

>> No.3926307

1. Ayn Rand (100%)
2. Jean-Paul Sartre (98%) 3. Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche (96%) 4. Epicureans (92%)
5. John Stuart Mill (87%) 6. Thomas Hobbes (85%) 7. David Hume (84%) 8. Prescriptivism (80%) 9. Aristotle (79%)
10. Immanuel Kant (79%) 11. Jeremy Bentham (73%) 12. Stoics (65%)
13. Cynics (63%)
14. Baruch (later known as Benedictus) Spinoza (58%)
15. Thomas Aquinas (57%)
16. Plato (50%)
17. William of Ockham (47%) 18. Nel Noddings (44%)
19. St. Augustine (26%)


Well, pretty close, I thought Hume would be higher, Ayn Rand at the top sounds about right. Also thought Spinoza would be higher.

>> No.3926305

1. Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche (100%)
2. Jean-Paul Sartre (100%)
3. Stoics (97%)
4. David Hume (94%)
5. Cynics (80%)
6. Thomas Hobbes (75%)
7. Immanuel Kant (66%)
8. Ayn Rand (55%)
9. Baruch (later known as Benedictus) Spinoza (52%)
10. Nel Noddings (50%)
11. Epicureans (47%)
12. St. Augustine (38%)
13. Jeremy Bentham (25%)
14. William of Ockham (25%)
15. Plato (25%)
16. Prescriptivism (22%)
17. John Stuart Mill (16%)
18. Thomas Aquinas (13%)
19. Aristotle (13%)

>> No.3926308

>>3926300
You bet your ass I will.

>> No.3926312
File: 7 KB, 102x124, 13731758767972.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3926312

>>3926298
I choose Karl Popper.

>> No.3926315

100% match to St. Augustine.

>> No.3926316

1. Stoics (100%)
2. Baruch (later known as Benedictus) Spinoza (90%)
3. Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche (88%)
4. David Hume (73%)
5. Ayn Rand (71%)
6. Jean-Paul Sartre (69%)
7. Immanuel Kant (61%)
8. Thomas Hobbes (60%)
9. Prescriptivism (56%)
10. Thomas Aquinas (54%)
11. Aristotle (53%)
12. Epicureans (50%)
13. Cynics (47%)
14. John Stuart Mill (43%)
15. Jeremy Bentham (40%)
16. Plato (33%)
17. St. Augustine (32%)
18. William of Ockham (29%)
19. Nel Noddings (11%)

I don't know how I feel about this

>> No.3926320
File: 123 KB, 473x454, philosophy results.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3926320

I don't know much about Ayn Rand, but I didn't expect to have her as my top result.

>> No.3926324

>>3926308
Don't waste your time, bro.

>> No.3926328

1. Thomas Hobbes (100%)
2. Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche (97%)
3. David Hume (92%)
4. Stoics (80%)
5. Jean-Paul Sartre (70%)
6. Epicureans (68%)
7. Nel Noddings (66%)
8. Cynics (63%)
9. Aristotle (62%)
10. Ayn Rand (59%)
11. Baruch (later known as Benedictus) Spinoza (51%)
12. Jeremy Bentham (50%)
13. Thomas Aquinas (49%)
14. Plato (42%)
15. John Stuart Mill (37%)
16. St. Augustine (32%)
17. Immanuel Kant (28%)
18. Prescriptivism (23%)
19. William of Ockham (6%)

>> No.3926330

>>3926312
Yeah i bet you're gonna go 'Popper' a dick in your mouth later fuccboi

>> No.3926332

I got 100% St. Augustine...

twice

>> No.3926335

>>3926330
>doesn't know a thing about ethical philosophy
>thinks kant and aquinas are the only two options
>drops awful pun when the conversation goes beyond his reading level
>>>/b/

>> No.3926336
File: 44 KB, 640x480, Disgusted.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3926336

>>3926324
Why not?

>> No.3926339

>>3926336
I mean, if you're religious, go for it. I think that's most of the reason I dislike him. Also a lot of his stuff doesn't make sense.

>> No.3926341

>>3926339
>hurr

>> No.3926345

>>3926339
I'm not religious per say, but that doesn't mean I'm not open to learning about religion. More agnostic than anything. I appreciate it, though.

>> No.3926348

>>3926341
I just think something as important as morality should be drawn from reasoning, not spiritual 'revelation'.

>> No.3926349

>>3926339
Oh please, I bet your philosophy makes SO much more sense than Aquinas's.

>> No.3926351

>>3926349
Well, I don't have an ethical philosophy of my own, but the one I support, in my opinion, makes more sense than Aquinas's.

>> No.3926354
File: 512 KB, 1372x1894, adornochillin.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3926354

fuck false dichotomies all over this thing. couldn't even finish it.

>"What I mean by reified consciousness, I can illustrate—without elaborate philosophical contemplation—most simply with an American experience. Among the frequently changing colleagues which the Princeton Project provided me with, was a young lady. After a few days, she had gained confidence in me, and asked most kindly: “Dr Adorno, would you mind a personal question?”. I said, “It depends on the question, but just go ahead”, and she went on: “Please tell me: are you an extrovert or an introvert?”. It was as if she, as a living being, already thought according to the model of multi-choice questions in questionnaires.”

>> No.3926358

>>3926354
Haha oh man, that's a great quote. And it's all too true these days. I took a course in psychology ('murica) not too long ago where we basically spent the whole quarter discussing questions like these.

Is this Adorno character a good read?

>> No.3926359

>>3926348

If you try and draw morality from pure reasoning and you close yourself off from spirituality then you come to the conclusion that there is no such thing as morality. Jesus all the way baby.

>> No.3926360
File: 22 KB, 400x400, kq979vR0Hz1qzma4ho1_400.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3926360

>>3926359
Well, without humanity, there isn't a such thing as morality. Do you think rocks follow an ethical code? No, morality is a social construct.

>> No.3926362

1. Ayn Rand (100%)
2. Jean-Paul Sartre (88%)
3. Thomas Aquinas (76%)
4. David Hume (73%)
5. Cynics (70%)
6. Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche (70%)
7. Aristotle (69%)
8. Nel Noddings (65%)
9. Thomas Hobbes (64%)
10. John Stuart Mill (57%)
11. Stoics (57%)
12. Plato (52%)
13. Immanuel Kant (50%)
14. Baruch (later known as Benedictus) Spinoza (50%)
15. Jeremy Bentham (46%)
16. St. Augustine (42%)
17. William of Ockham (42%)
18. Epicureans (34%)
19. Prescriptivism (26%)

>what the fuck I don't agree with Ayn's Objectivist bullshit?

>> No.3926365
File: 83 KB, 709x581, my most compatible philosophers.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3926365

>tfw I don't even into philosophy
rate me /soc/

>> No.3926368
File: 401 KB, 419x557, thispleasesteddy.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3926368

>>3926358
Adorno is just the miserable sort of read that one deserves.

If you're into psychology you might want to check out The Stars Down to Earth

>> No.3926369

>>3926365
could be better
could be worse
solid 6/10

>> No.3926377

>>3926365
5 or 6

>> No.3926386

>>3926365
1.5/10
>>3926354
yeah its terrible, though i find it funny i got hobbes and nietzsche at the top when i went out of to my way to avoid answers that seemed particularly hobbes or nietzsche.

>> No.3926394
File: 386 KB, 638x825, 1232168135194.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3926394

St. Augustine 100%

Cool.

>> No.3926399

im the nietzsche 100 guy what does it mean

>> No.3926401

>>3926399

you're edgy and probably a college freshman

>> No.3926404

>>3926368
Interesting. I'd certainly like to read him one day. Is much reading of Freud necessary beforehand? I see that he was certainly influenced by psychoanalysis.

>> No.3926409

I recieved a 100% on Baruch Spinoza. I think this test is terribly flawed, but I guess I'll ask: Does /lit/ think he is worth a read?

>> No.3926411

>>3926404
yeah Freud would be a plus and he takes some influence from him but it's not really all that heavy - I've never read much Freud and have no trouble navigating Adorno's explicitly psychoanalytic moments. Freud is not to Adorno as Lacan is to Zizek, for instance.

his collection Critical Models would probably be a great introduction really.

>> No.3926417

1.Jean-Paul Sartre (100%)
2.Immanuel Kant (96%)
3.Stoics (91%)
4.John Stuart Mill (80%)
5.Thomas Aquinas (77%)
6.Ayn Rand (77%)
7.David Hume (72%)
8.Aristotle (70%)
9.Baruch (later known as Benedictus) Spinoza (66%)
10.Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche (61%)
11.Jeremy Bentham (58%)
12.Nel Noddings (58%)
13.St. Augustine (46%)
14.Thomas Hobbes (43%)
15.Epicureans (41%)
16. Plato (41%)
17.Cynics (35%)
18.Prescriptivism (29%)
19.William of Ockham (22%)
Rate?

>> No.3926421

Stoics (100%) Info & Notes
2. Thomas Aquinas (89%) Info & Notes
3. Cynics (87%) Info & Notes
4. Baruch (later known as Benedictus) Spinoza

>> No.3926422

>>3926401
i am also 100 sartre tho

>> No.3926424

1. Thomas Aquinas (100%)
2. St. Augustine (80%)
3. Baruch (later known as Benedictus) Spinoza (78%)
4. Aristotle (76%)
5. William of Ockham (59%)
6. Plato (51%)
7. Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche (44%)
8. Stoics (44%)
9. Jeremy Bentham (40%)
10. Epicureans (40%)

>> No.3926428

>>3926409
you shouldn't need /lit/ to tell you that Spinoza is worthwhile. read The Ethics if you don't mind le crazy geometric metaphysics with lemmas all over the place

>> No.3926431

I see a lot of people on here asking "is ____ worth reading?"
Just a friendly suggestion, since most of you seem genuinely interested in getting into philosophy: Sophie's World by Jostein Gaardner is a nice intro to philosophy in the form of a fictional story. It gets rather slow in some parts, but it beats the hell out of a textbook-styled intro.
Anyway, happy reading.

>> No.3926442

1. Immanuel Kant (100 %)
2. Jean-Paul Sartre (98 %)
3. Epicureans (93 %)
4. Nel Noddings (92 %)
5. John Stuart Mill (87 %)
6. Baruch (later known as Benedictus) Spinoza (82 %)
7. St. Augustine (81 %)
8. Thomas Aquinas (79 %)
9. Prescriptivism (79 %)
10. Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche (72 %)
11. Stoics (71 %)
12. William of Ockham (69 %)
13. Jeremy Bentham (66 %)
14. Thomas Hobbes (61 %)
15. David Hume (61 %)
16. Cynics (46 %)
17. Plato (40 %)
18. Ayn Rand (40 %)
19. Aristotle (38 %)

>> No.3926448
File: 273 KB, 1200x1800, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3926448

>>3926137

>> No.3926451

Top lel @ all the people getting rand and nietzsche

>> No.3926463

>>3926328
>Kant so low
>Hobbes upfront

Zeta pls

>> No.3926464

1) Thomas Aquinas (100%)
2) Jeremy Bentham (94%)
3) John Stuart Mill (94%)
4) Aristotle (83%)
5) Kant (82%)
6) Sartre (78%)
7) St. Augustine (66%)
8) Epicureans (65%)
9) Noddings (65%)
10) Spinoza (61%)
11) Rand (60%)
12) William of Ockham (59%)
13) Plato (55%)
14) Cynics (45%)
15) Stoics (45%)
16) Prescriptivism (44%)
17) Nietzsche (40%)
18) Hume (32%)
19) Hobbes (19%)

>> No.3926476

>>3926463
makes perfect sense if you consider i endlessly suck stirners cock on here, im not sure how the stoics got 80%'d tho

>> No.3926484

Hobbes 100%
J.S. Mill 97%
Sartre 93%
Rand 92%
Cynics 85%

Already read Mill and Sartre. Not familiar with Hobbes other than the maxim "life is nasty, brutish, and short". Given that, how did I do in regard to Hobbes?

>> No.3926486

>>3926360
Possibly the worst argument I've read all week. What are you 13?

Well, without humanity, there isn't a such thing as infinity. Do you think rocks follow abstraction? No, infinity is a social construct.

Well, without humanity, there isn't a such thing as Moon. Do you think giraffes reside on the Moon? No, the Moon is a social construct.

etc. etc.

>> No.3926492

>>3926486
Infinity is not a social construct, as it exists in mathematics.
The Moon is not a social construct, as it exists tangibly.
Either of those things would continue to exist if the human race suddenly vanished from existence.
Morality, on the other hand, would cease to exist without humans to practice it/pass it around.

If you can't understand this logic, I'm gonna have to dismiss you as a troll (1.5/10 btw)

>> No.3926494

>>3926492
I disagree with the humans part. If you said "sentience", then I'd agree.

>> No.3926502

>>3926494
go away godfag

>> No.3926503

Aquinas is just a Christian Aristotle.

>> No.3926504

>>3926492
Lmao

Not even going to bother answering to your embarrassing twaddle

>> No.3926508

>>3926348
Aquinas is not who you think he is

>> No.3926510

>>3926494
For the sake of the argument, I think it's safe to just say humans. However, if you want to split hairs, be my guest. Without sentient beings, morality cannot exist. It doesn't change the fact that "If you try and draw morality from pure reasoning and you close yourself off from spirituality then you come to the conclusion that there is no such thing as morality. Jesus all the way baby." is a fruitless argument.

>> No.3926511

1. Nel Noddings (100%) Info & Notes
2. Jean-Paul Sartre (96%) Info & Notes
3. Immanuel Kant (95%) Info & Notes
4. Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche (78%) Info & Notes
5. Baruch (later known as Benedictus) Spinoza (76%) Info & Notes
6. John Stuart Mill (75%) Info & Notes
7. Thomas Aquinas (70%) Info & Notes
8. Jeremy Bentham (70%) Info & Notes
9. Aristotle (66%) Info & Notes
10. Epicureans (66%) Info & Notes
11. David Hume (63%) Info & Notes
12. Stoics (61%) Info & Notes
13. Ayn Rand (60%) Info & Notes
14. Prescriptivism (55%) Info & Notes
15. Cynics (50%) Info & Notes
16. William of Ockham (48%) Info & Notes
17. Thomas Hobbes (45%) Info & Notes
18. St. Augustine (42%) Info & Notes
19. Plato (22%)

>> No.3926514

1. Epicureans (100%)
2. Baruch (later known as Benedictus) Spinoza (97%)
3. . Thomas Aquinas (86%)
4. Aristotle (77%)
5. Jeremy Bentham (77%)
6. John Stuart Mill (60%)
7. Stoics (59%)
8. Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche (56%)
9. St. Augustine (54%)
10. Thomas Hobbes (48%)
11. Jean-Paul Sartre (48%)
12. Nel Noddings (45%)
13. Plato (45%)
14. Cynics (40%)
15. Immanuel Kant (37%)
16. Ayn Rand (35%)
17. David Hume (33%)
18. William of Ockham (25%)
19. Prescriptivism (17%)

This pleases me, since I was about to start a few books on Epicureanism anyway.

>> No.3926516

>>3926511
Show tits

>> No.3926522

>>3926508
Honestly, I quit trying to learn about him when I learned that his ethical system revolved around the existence of a God. God is not a source of morality. If he were, we would have to ask ourselves where God derived his system of ethics from. It's just passing the buck.

>> No.3926523

>>3926510
I'm saying morality is intrinsic to any form of life capable of building civilizations because a set code of morality is necessary for civilization to occur (so, before it starts morality is there). So, yes, I believe morality is intrinsic to humans. God has nothing to do with my argument.

>> No.3926526

>>3926511
No info & notes for Plato?

>> No.3926528

>>3926522
Did you consider you might have a slightly different notion of God than him?

>> No.3926531

>>3926526
he's dead

>> No.3926533

>>3926531
Oh, right.

>> No.3926535

>>3926523
>morality is intrinsic to humans.
Please elaborate.
>God has nothing to do with my argument.
please tell me this isn't the same person who just said "Jesus all the way baby."
>>3926359

>> No.3926536

>>3926522
What if God arbitrarily decided what "good" is and what "evil" is? He didn't derive it, he created it. Would that satisfy your question, or would you have more?

>> No.3926539

>>3926528
Yes, then I learned about his ideas of a virtuous person. Please don't get me started on the unoriginal and moronic Aquinas.

>> No.3926542
File: 145 KB, 578x677, topkek.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3926542

Can someone tell me if this means I am /lit/ patriarch or plebeian?

Isn't JPS in the same league with Albert Camus?

>> No.3926543

>>3926539
HE'S MORE ORIGINAL THAN YOU

>> No.3926547

>>3926531
lel'd

>> No.3926550

>>3926536
Of course, I would have more. Simply pointing and saying "that's good" or "that's bad" leaves more questions than answers. Why is one thing good and another thing bad/evil? What is God's logic behind that? If you keep going down this path, you eventually just have to say "it just is that way," which I don't find satisfactory at all in fields like philosophy or science.

>> No.3926552

>>3926543
At least I'm not a moron.

>> No.3926554

>>3926543
And if taking an ethical system and modifying it is considered original, then actually, he is just as original as I am.

>> No.3926558

>>3926554
that's a pretty unoriginal way of measuring originality wow

>> No.3926563

>>3926558
He took Aristotle's ideas and merged them with the church.

I don't see any originality in that at all. Can you open my eyes a little? What do you see?

>> No.3926582
File: 165 KB, 773x1024, filosofo-nietzsche.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3926582

No surprise.

>> No.3926615

>>3926137
100% David Hume, 98% Nietzsche.

This is surprisingly accurate...but how do I know it to be accurate... how do I know it to be at all!?

>> No.3926620

>>3926137
God dammit. Here with me never reading philosophy, I thought I might have had a different combination of beliefs. Turns out, after further reading, that David Hume describes me 100%. Fuck, guess I'm not going to be anything but a fat scot.

>> No.3926621

>>3926615
Fuckin' this

>> No.3926624

>>3926137
>100% Ayn Rand
>believe in charity, altruism, and compassion as high moral ideals

why

>> No.3926625

>>3926141
well at least you're humble

>> No.3926636

>>3926624
~wonder why~

The author of the test is obviously a randian.

>> No.3926638

Speaking of "what should I read?" Are there any good post modern philosophy texts I can get into? Gonna grab simulacra and simulation when I can if that helps

>> No.3926648

100% epicureanism

hell yeah

>> No.3926660

>>3926354
adorno was a dick

he probably saw nothing wrong with hittin it though, even though it, as a living being, already thought according to the model of multi-choice questions in questionaires

>> No.3926667

>>3926137
I got JPS? I am a pragmatist, not a relativistic existentialist. That was a horse shit questionnaire. There wasn't even a pragmatist on the list!

>> No.3926670

1. Thomas Aquinas (100%)
2. Jean-Paul Sartre (99%)
3. Aristotle (86%)
4. John Stuart Mill (86%)

makes sense. i follow aristotelian virtue ethics, with some slight deviations, and the aquinas makes sense since he was influenced by ari. utilitarianism i also like, so jsmill makes sense.
sartre, too, i like a lot. existentialism i think is very relavant and i think is the prevailing mode of thinking about life. though that mode of thinking essentially leaves us carte blanche and enables us to pick whatever moral code we want so long as we stick to it.

>> No.3926701
File: 64 KB, 471x613, philosophy huh.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3926701

Did I do good /lit/?

>> No.3926704

Doesn't matter what you choose, you all end up existentialist.

>> No.3926712

100% John Stuart Mill
92% kant
what?

>> No.3926719
File: 12 KB, 480x571, morality.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3926719

How's this?

>> No.3926720

>>3926704
>existentialism baby thinking his philosophy is inherently correct

>> No.3926729

Bentham #1, Mill #2

Am I the only utilitarian on /lit/?

>> No.3926754

1. Cynics (100%)
2. Thomas Hobbes (97%)
3. Ayn Rand (79%)
4. David Hume (67%)
5. Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche (66%)
6. John Stuart Mill (66%)
7. Thomas Aquinas (63%)
8. Jeremy Bentham (60%)
9. Jean-Paul Sartre (58%)
10. Epicureans (52%)
11. Stoics (52%)
12. Nel Noddings (43%)
13. Plato (43%)
14. Aristotle (42%)
15. Baruch (later known as Benedictus) Spinoza (35%)
16. St. Augustine (18%)
17. Prescriptivism (15%)
18. Immanuel Kant (11%)
19. William of Ockham (11%)

>> No.3926795

>>3926754
Who is Nel Noddings?
Also, yours and mine are almost completely opposite...

>> No.3926819
File: 94 KB, 715x596, sartre was smarter.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3926819

god damn i'm patrician

>> No.3926860

>>3926795
Tell me about yourself. For comparison.

>> No.3926867

I'm 100% hobees, nigga

>> No.3926868

>>3926137
1. Thomas Aquinas (100%) Info & Notes
2. Jeremy Bentham (90%) Info & Notes
3. Jean-Paul Sartre (81%) Info & Notes
4. Cynics (80%) Info & Notes
5. Baruch (later known as Benedictus) Spinoza (76%) Info & Notes
6. Immanuel Kant (74%) Info & Notes
7. John Stuart Mill (71%) Info & Notes
8. Ayn Rand (68%) Info & Notes
9. Stoics (61%) Info & Notes
10. Aristotle (61%) Info & Notes
11. Plato (61%) Info & Notes
12. Thomas Hobbes (54%) Info & Notes
13. St. Augustine (53%) Info & Notes
14. Epicureans (51%) Info & Notes
15. Prescriptivism (50%) Info & Notes
16. Nel Noddings (47%) Info & Notes
17. William of Ockham (44%) Info & Notes
18. Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche (34%) Info & Notes
19. David Hume (33%)

if you wanna contact, i'll be at /soc/

>> No.3926905

>>3926625
HAH

>> No.3926926
File: 47 KB, 454x434, philosophy.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3926926

I thought utilitarianism and Kant's ethics were irreconcilable. Guess not haha. Also, I score low on stoics but I have the greatest respect for their position.

>> No.3926947

1. Jean-Paul Sartre (100%)
2. Immanuel Kant (81%)
3. John Stuart Mill (80%)
4. Stoics (80%)
5. David Hume (67%)
6. Baruch (later known as Benedictus) Spinoza (64%)
7. Thomas Aquinas (63%)
8. Jeremy Bentham (60%)
9. Epicureans (60%)
10. Thomas Hobbes (58%)
11. Nel Noddings (55%)
12. Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche (53%)
13. Aristotle (52%)
14. Prescriptivism (47%)
15. Cynics (42%)
16. Plato (41%)
17. St. Augustine (38%)
18. Ayn Rand (36%)
19. William of Ockham (25%)

>> No.3927065

1. Jeremy Bentham (100%)
2. John Stuart Mill (100%)

legit

>> No.3927093

Got Bentham and Mill as no 1 and 2

wtf man,I don't even like utilitarism

>> No.3927145

1. Epicureans (100%)
2. John Stuart Mill (94%)
3. Thomas Aquinas (87%)
4. Immanuel Kant (86%)
5. Aristotle (85%)
6. Jean-Paul Sartre (80%)
7. Baruch Spinoza (78%)
8. Ayn Rand (75%)
9. Stoics (70%)
10. Jeremy Bentham (69%)
11. Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche (56%)
12. David Hume (53%)
13. Prescriptivism (53%)
14. St. Augustine (50%)
15. Nel Noddings (47%)
16. Plato (43%)
17. Thomas Hobbes (41%)
18. William of Ockham (31%)
19. Cynics (17%)

A little worried about how high Rand ranks, but otherwise pretty much accurate I think.

>> No.3927150

>>3926349
>>3926351
*Aquinas'

>> No.3927158
File: 53 KB, 461x421, Sartre.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3927158

>>3926947
Hey, I got Sartre as well.

>> No.3927159

1. Thomas Hobbes (100%)
2. Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche (97%)
3. David Hume (94%)
4. Jean-Paul Sartre (82%)
5. Cynics (72%)
6. Stoics (70%)
7. Epicureans (64%)
8. Ayn Rand (54%)
9. Nel Noddings (51%)
10. Baruch (later known as Benedictus) Spinoza (48%)
11. Plato (45%)
12. William of Ockham (39%)
13. Aristotle (38%)
14. Immanuel Kant (38%)
15. Prescriptivism (38%)
16. John Stuart Mill (36%)
17. Thomas Aquinas (27%)
18. St. Augustine (25%)
19. Jeremy Bentham (22%)

I would have put Kant lower.

>> No.3927161

1. Jean-Paul Sartre (100%)
2. Ayn Rand (79%)
3. Cynics (68%) Info
4. Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche (58%)
5. David Hume (55%)
6. Thomas Hobbes (54%)
7. Prescriptivism (53%)
8. Immanuel Kant (53%)
9. Baruch (later known as Benedictus) Spinoza (51%)
10. Stoics (50%) Info
11. Thomas Aquinas (41%)
12. John Stuart Mill (40%)
13. St. Augustine (35%)
14. Nel Noddings (35%)
15. Jeremy Bentham (34%)
16. William of Ockham (28%)
17. Plato (21%)
18. Aristotle (18%)
19. Epicureans (15%)

I should probably go and re-think some things.

>> No.3927165
File: 54 KB, 477x432, Picture 7.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3927165

I'm not sure how I feel about this.

>> No.3927167

>>3926157
>Thomas Aquinas

My boy

>> No.3927168

1) Jeremy Bentham (100%)

2) John Stuart Mill (89%)

3) Immanuel Kant (84%)

4) Jean-Paul Sartre (82%)

NOOOOOO! Mah Sartre! Don't leave me babe.

>> No.3927172

1. Aristotlees (100%)
2. Ayn Rand (98%)
3. Baruch (later known as Benedictus) Spinoza (89%)
4. Immanuel Kant (85%)
5. Jean-Paul Sartre (82%)
6. Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche (78%) 7. Stoics (78%)
8. Tomas Aquino (72%)
9. David Hume (65%)
10. Epicureans (63%)
11. John Stuart Mill (55%)
12. St. Augustinus (53%)
13. Thomas Hobbes (52%)
14. Platon (50%)
15. Jeremy Bentham (49%)
16. William of Ockham (43%)
17. Nel Noddings (37%)
18. Prescriptivism (37%)
19. Cynics (28%)

Ayn Rand is 2nd.

Whad did I do wrong?

>> No.3927173

>>3927168
present but not voting.

>mageand corpus

>> No.3927184

1. Jean-Paul Sartre (100%)
2. Thomas Hobbes (93%)
3. David Hume (88%)
4. John Stuart Mill (88%)
5. Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche (85%)
6. Epicureans (85%)
7. Ayn Rand (74%)
8. Cynics (72%)
9. Stoics (71%)
10. Nel Noddings (69%)
11. Immanuel Kant (68%)
12. Jeremy Bentham (68%)
13. Thomas Aquinas (54%)
14. Aristotle (47%)
15. Baruch (later known as Benedictus) Spinoza (47%)
16. Prescriptivism (45%)
17. Plato (41%)
18. William of Ockham (27%)
19. St. Augustine (25%)

How do?

>> No.3927189

>>3927173
>present but not voting.

Which just described my entire approach to modern "democracy", yeah I can dig it.

My mind is open and my body's ready there Jeremy Baby! Let's do this.

>> No.3927193

Cynics (100%)
Stoics (91%)
David Hume (85%)
Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche (83%)
Thomas Aquinas (81%)
St. Augustine (78%)
Baruch (later known as Benedictus) Spinoza(78%)
Jean-Paul Sartre (72%)
Thomas Hobbes (70%)
Plato (70%)
Ayn Rand (68%)
Aristotle (60%)
Nel Noddings (47%)
John Stuart Mill (45%)
William of Ockham (44%)
Jeremy Bentham (42%)
Immanuel Kant (40%)
Epicureans (29%)
Prescriptivism (13%)

>> No.3927219
File: 70 KB, 461x469, philosophy.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3927219

Huh. Aquinas, Utilitarianism and Kant look odd together, but it does make some sort of sense, I guess. Thought that Hobbes would be much higher, however.

>> No.3927233

1. Aristotle (100%)
2. Thomas Aquinas (87%) 3. John Stuart Mill (82%) 4. Ayn Rand (78%) 5. Jeremy Bentham (74%)

As a complete novice, did I win or lose?

>> No.3927244

I know next to nothing about philosophy, so I don't know what this means really. But, whatever.

1. Thomas Hobbes (100%)
2. Thomas Aquinas (88%)
3. Aristotle (88%)
4. Jeremy Bentham (86%)
5. Baruch (later known as Benedictus) Spinoza (72%)
6. Epicureans (67%)
7. Jean-Paul Sartre (67%)
8. Stoics (57%)
9. Cynics (56%)
10. John Stuart Mill (53%)
11. Plato (53%)
12. Ayn Rand (44%)
13. David Hume (43%)
14. Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche (43%)
15. Prescriptivism (40%)
16. Nel Noddings (37%)
17. St. Augustine (34%)
18. Immanuel Kant (32%)
19. William of Ockham (17%)

>> No.3927273

1. Epicureans (100%)
2. Jean-Paul Sartre (90%)
is this good or bad? Haven't concerned myself with philosophy at all.

>> No.3927350

1. Jean-Paul Sartre (100%) 2. Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche (86%)
3. David Hume (83%)

>> No.3927674

1.Thomas Aquinas
2. Aristotle
3, Baruch (later known as Benedictus) Spinoza
4. John Stuart Mill
5. Stoics
6. Jeremy Bentham
7. Immanuel Kant
8. Ayn Rand (implying she's a philosopher)
9. St. Augustine
10. Epicureans

Where do I begin with Aquinas's work?

>> No.3927678

>all this thomas aquinas

/lit/ confirmed for sexless, guilt-ridden neckbeards

>> No.3927707

Welp, my taste for benevolent dictatorships sure shows.

1. Thomas Hobbes (100%)
2. Jeremy Bentham (87%)
3. Stoics (78%)
4. Thomas Aquinas (75%)
5. Aristotle (75%)
6. Jean-Paul Sartre (72%)
7. Cynics (70%)
8. David Hume (65%)
9. John Stuart Mill (65%)
10. Ayn Rand (65%)
11. Epicureans (62%)
12. Baruch (later known as Benedictus) Spinoza (61%)
13. Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche (60%)
14. Plato (60%)
15. Immanuel Kant (47%)
16. Nel Noddings (47%)
17. Prescriptivism (44%)
18. William of Ockham (20%)
19. St. Augustine (15%)

>> No.3927717

Nietzsche 100%
Sartre 89%
Hume 86%

>> No.3927723

1. Thomas Aquinas (100%)
2. Immanuel Kant (89%)
3. Stoics (74%)

>> No.3927725

1. Stoics (100%)
2. Immanuel Kant (88%)
3. Jean-Paul Sartre (86%)

Bow to your new Stoic overlord.

>> No.3927727

I think this thread would marry nicely with a penpal thread

>> No.3927729

1. Thomas Hobbes (100%)
2. Stoics (93%)
3. Epicureans (90%)
4. Baruch (later known as Benedictus) Spinoza (83%)
5. Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche (81%)
6. Jeremy Bentham (81%)
7. Jean-Paul Sartre (81%)
8. Aristotle (80%)
9. Thomas Aquinas (73%)
10. Immanuel Kant (71%)
11. John Stuart Mill (67%)
12. David Hume (66%)
13. Cynics (63%)
14. Nel Noddings (57%)
15. Prescriptivism (57%)
16. Ayn Rand (51%)
17. Plato (46%)
18. William of Ockham (35%)
19. St. Augustine (23%)

Someone tell me what this means.

>> No.3927756

>>3927725
>Stoics
>closely followed by Kant
How does it feel to be the most boring kind of people ever?

>> No.3927772

>>3926137

sorry guys but I think this test is bullshit. I don't even like Nietzsche at all and got 100%

>> No.3927779

Philosophy starts at Plato and ends at Emerson.

Faggots.

>> No.3927780
File: 128 KB, 954x838, imma read ethics.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3927780

Pretty interesting. I remember the first time I took this exact test, my top three were existentialists. Good to see I'm changing.

>> No.3927783

>>3927772
If it were completely legitimate, there'd be no way you could get 100%- at least it's interesting

>> No.3927792

>>3927725

1.Stoics (100%)
2.Cynics (92%)
3.Immanuel Kant (88%)

I've always had disdain for Kant's intransigeant ethics and his a priori bullshit so I'm wondering what the hell he's doing in third place.

>> No.3927808

>>3927792
>his a priori bullshit
Lmao, look at this idiot, mom! Point at him and laugh!

>> No.3927813

>>3927779
your ignorance.

>> No.3927827
File: 89 KB, 553x456, poop.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3927827

I don't real philosophy who the hell is this guy?

>> No.3927828

>>3927783

yeah i probably so share some of his views that i dont know about

>> No.3927842

Your top match for Ethical Philosophy Selector is:
Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche

Live for yourselves!

>> No.3927856

1. Thomas Aquinas (100%)
2. John Stuart Mill (96%)
3. Jeremy Bentham (91%)
4. Aristotle (82%)
5. Plato (72%)
6. Immanuel Kant (70%)
7. St. Augustine (53%)
8. Baruch (later known as Benedictus) Spinoza (50%)
9. Prescriptivism (46%)
10. Stoics (46%)
11. Jean-Paul Sartre (37%)
12. Ayn Rand (33%)
13. Epicureans (29%)
14. William of Ockham (29%)
15. Nel Noddings (27%)
16. David Hume (25%)
17. Thomas Hobbes (19%)
18. Cynics (14%)
19. Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche (8%)

>> No.3927860

>>3927756
strange. nobody has ever accused me of being boring or stable in my life.

>> No.3927891

>>3926137
Nietzsche

Will I have an original thought /lit/?

>> No.3927894

>>3927891
Yes, but your sister will ruin everything.

>> No.3927913

i did it twice with little different answers. can you tell in which questions are differences?

first results:
1. Jean-Paul Sartre (100%)
2. Baruch (later known as Benedictus) Spinoza (75%)
3. Immanuel Kant (72%)
4. John Stuart Mill (66%)
5. Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche (65%)

second:
1. Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche (100%)
2. Jean-Paul Sartre (94%)
3. avid Hume (91%)
4. Ayn Rand (72%)
5. Baruch Spinoza (later known as Benedictus) (72%)

>> No.3927915

>>3927913
You ticked the 'of no importance' option in the second.

>> No.3927939

1. Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche
2. Jean-Paul Sartre (90%)
3. David Hume (90%)
4. Stoics (90%)
5. Baruch (later known as Benedictus) Spinoza (83%)
6. Thomas Hobbes (78%)
7. Cynics (74%)
8. Immanuel Kant (65%)
9. Nel Noddings (55%)
10. Ayn Rand (51%)
11. Epicureans (41%)
12. Thomas Aquinas (39%)
13. St. Augustine (34%)
14. Prescriptivism (33%) 15. William of Ockham (25%)
16. Aristotle (22%)
17. Jeremy Bentham (20%)
18. John Stuart Mill (20%)
19. Plato (16%)

>> No.3927949

1. Epicureans (100%)
2. Jean-Paul Sartre (94%)
3. Jeremy Bentham (93%)
4. John Stuart Mill (93%)
5. Cynics (90%)

I approve.

>> No.3927994

>>3927860
Well, then this test is bullshit or you don't really use to follow your moral principles.

>> No.3928018

>>3927915
:)
no, not so easy... essentially I chose more selfish and self confident answers

>> No.3928083

1. Thomas Hobbes (100%)
2. Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche (96%)
3. David Hume (79%)
4. Jean-Paul Sartre (70%)
5. Epicureans (64%)

First time on /lit/, can I stay guys?

>> No.3928122
File: 280 KB, 1366x768, Screenshot from 2013-07-11 14:33:48.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3928122

>>3926137
Well, that clenches it, I finally have to sit down and read Sartre.

Any suggestions from anyone on where to start?

>> No.3928129

1. Thomas Hobbes (100%)
2. Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche (91%)
3. David Hume (90%)
4. Cynics (76%)

I'm okay with this.

>> No.3928137
File: 156 KB, 960x1280, stirner96.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3928137

>no stirner

>> No.3928226
File: 212 KB, 640x960, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3928226

Did I do good
I've never read Kant

>> No.3928258

>>3928083
Definitely.

>> No.3929262

Yo.

>> No.3929281

Epicureans - 100%
Ayn Rand - 86%
Immanuel Kant - 84%

how mad are you?

>> No.3929291

>>3928137
stirner should be the result of if you just choose all the "doesn't matter / dislike all choices" answers

because i would find that funny

>> No.3929300
File: 92 KB, 701x599, im awesome.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3929300

The only one I agreed with was:

>People will be good only when ruling forces of society use the power of force to make them be as such.

The rest didn't matter.

>> No.3929309

1. Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche (100%)
2. Epicureans (76%)
3. David Hume (755)
4. Stoics (68%)
5. Thomas Hobbes (60%)

damn straight

>> No.3929348

>>3929309
kill yourself

>> No.3929360

>>3926137
1. Jean-Paul Sartre (100%)
2. Jeremy Bentham (68%)
3. Cynics (67%)
4. Immanuel Kant (67%)
5. Thomas Aquinas (65%)

>> No.3929398

1. Sartre 100%
2. Nel Noddings 78%
3. Aquinas 70%
whatever

>> No.3929463

>>3926486
lol What the fuck am I reading? what is this? Babby's first argument?

>> No.3929486
File: 53 KB, 700x457, 1345311347818.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3929486

1. Judith Butler (100%)
2. bell hooks (69%)
3. Mary Wollstonecraft (55%)
4. Virginia Slims (45%)
5. Simone deBeauvoir (22%)

>> No.3929488

1. Baruch Spinoza (100%)
2. Thomas Aquinas (86%)
3. Aristotle (70%)
4. St. Augustine (65%)
5. Jeremy Bentham (63%)

>> No.3929489
File: 56 KB, 475x602, ethicalphilosophy.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3929489

I don't know shit about philosophy.

>> No.3929505

1. Ayn Rand (100%)
2. Immanuel Kant (94%)
3. John Stuart Mill (94%)
4. Thomas Aquinas (92%)
5. Aristotle (90%)
6. Jean-Paul Sartre (70%)
7. David Hume (66%)
8. Stoics (66%)
9. Epicureans (64%)
10. Nel Noddings (64%)
11. Prescriptivism (64%)

>> No.3929524
File: 36 KB, 264x400, 1357539097626.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3929524

1. Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche (100%)
2.Baruch (later known as Benedictus)Spinoza (74%)
3. Stoics (70%)
4. Jean-Paul Sartre (69%) Info & Notes
5. David Hume (66%)
6. Cynics (50%)

>le angsty teenager face

>> No.3929537
File: 10 KB, 193x245, KornWorry.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3929537

>>3929486
1. Thomas Aquinas (100%)
2. John Stuart Mill (100%)
3. Aristotle (81%)
4. Epicureans (76%)

W.w.what does this mean /lit/? Am I destined to become some kind of mutated Christian/Humanist melange?

>> No.3929549

Fuck this. I'm Thomas Aquinas, 100%. In practical terms I'm more or less a Schmittian, though. Should I take more Xanax or not? Half or one milligram?

>> No.3929556

>>3929537
>implying Humanism was not birthed by Christian Humanism

>> No.3929560

>>3929549
pls mail me some

>> No.3929564

>>3929549
hell yah man let's get weird

and kind of catholic-fascist

hell yeah

>> No.3929565

>>3929560
Is that a one or a half?

Go to your shrink, that's what the rest of us do.

>> No.3929875

>>3926860
that must suck not getting a reply

>> No.3929905

1. Baruch (later known as Benedictus) Spinoza (100%)
2. Thomas Aquinas (92%)
3. Stoics (81%)

>> No.3929914

Who are you if you got tired after the 1st question and closed the page?

>> No.3929945

>>3929914
Normal people.

>> No.3929994

1. Jeremy Bentham (100%)
2. John Stuart Mill (100%)
3. Jean-Paul Sartre (100%)
4. Epicureans (80%)
5. Thomas Aquinas (79%)
6. Nel Noddings (76%)
7. Immanuel Kant (69%)
8. Thomas Hobbes (64%)
9. Aristotle (63%)
10. Plato (48%)
11. Cynics (44%)
12. St. Augustine (43%)
13. David Hume (40%)
14. Ayn Rand (40%)
15. Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche (36%)
16. Prescriptivism (36%)
17. Baruch (later known as Benedictus) Spinoza (35%)
18. Stoics (34%)
19. William of Ockham (16%)

>> No.3930014

>Thomas Aquinas (100%

Yet I would consider myself a Cynic.

>> No.3930019

>>3929914
Pyrrohnist

>> No.3930044

1. Jeremy Bentham (100%)
2. John Stuart Mill (100%)
3. Epicureans (95%)
4. Prescriptivism (82%)
5. Immanuel Kant (78%)
6. Nel Noddings (73%)
7. Jean-Paul Sartre (65%)
8. Cynics (56%)
9. Ayn Rand (52%)

>> No.3930051

>>3929994

Marry me.

>> No.3930057

>>3930051
I - >>3930044 - could marry you instead, if you'd like.

>> No.3930063

>>3930057
>7. Jean-Paul Sartre (65%)

Pass.

>> No.3930072

>>3926348

Pretty sure you're thinking of Augustine more than Aquinas, bruh.

>> No.3930074

1. John Stuart Mill (100%)
2. Jean-Paul Sartre (90%)
3. Epicureans (86%)
4. Immanuel Kant (84%)
5. Ayn Rand (71%)
6. Thomas Aquinas (67%)
7. Prescriptivism (67%)
8. Aristotle (65%)
9. Jeremy Bentham (63%)
10. Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche (57%)
11. William of Ockham (57%)
12. Baruch (later known as Benedictus) Spinoza (55%)
13. Stoics (51%)
14. David Hume (46%)
15. St. Augustine (40%)
16. Thomas Hobbes (34%)
17. Nel Noddings (34%)
18. Plato (32%)
19. Cynics (17%)

>> No.3930083

Aristotle(97%)
Jean-Paul Sartre(87%)
David Hume(86%)
St. Augustine(84%)
Epicureans(84%)
Thomas Hobbes(82%)
John Stuart Mill(82%)
Thomas Aquinas(78%)
Ayn Rand(75%)
Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche(69%)
Nel Noddings(64%)
Jeremy Bentham(62%)
Baruch (later known as Benedictus) Spinoza(55%)
Cynics(45%)
Stoics(41%)
Immanuel Kant(21%)
Prescriptivism(21%)
William of Ockham(12%)


i dont even

>> No.3930085

>>3930083

>cut off my 100 percent

It was Plato.

Top five were Plato, Aristotle, Sartre, Hume, Augustine.

>> No.3930103

I'm not into philosophy, am I okay or a pleb?

1. Jean-Paul Sartre (100%)
2. Ayn Rand (90%)
3. Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche (85%)
4. Thomas Aquinas (75%)
5. David Hume (73%)
6. Prescriptivism (73%)
7. Baruch (later known as Benedictus) Spinoza (73%)
8. Stoics (72%)
9. Thomas Hobbes (70%)
10. Aristotle (68%)
11. John Stuart Mill (67%)
12. Immanuel Kant (65%)
13. William of Ockham (63%)
14. Jeremy Bentham (59%)
15. Cynics (59%)
16. Epicureans (59%)
17. Plato (44%)
18. St. Augustine (42%)
19. Nel Noddings (18%)

>> No.3930106

1. Jean-Paul Sartre (100%)
2. Immanuel Kant (86%)
3. John Stuart Mill (76%)
4. Ayn Rand (69%)
5. Jeremy Bentham (63%)
6. Prescriptivism (48%)
7. Thomas Aquinas (42%)
8. Epicureans (38%)
9. Aristotle (36%)
10. Stoics (29%)
11. St. Augustine (28%)
12. Baruch (27%)
13. William of Ockham (26%)
14. Nel Noddings (18%)
15. Plato (16%)
16. David Hume (14%)
17. Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche (14%)
18. Thomas Hobbes (12%)
19. Cynics (0%)

Why do we keep doing these tests when we know they are garbage? I'm personally very insulted Mill was above Bentham in my results. And wtf with Ayn Rand? She's not a legitimate philosopher. To put her instead of Heidegger, Hegel, Fichte, Schelling, Leibniz, Descartes, and Adorno is a travesty. Mind you, the test focuses on ethics. Still. The person who made it knows more about compusci than philosophy.