Worst/stupidest/most insane philosophies thread? I'll start. >Anything Nietzsche said >Post-Structuralism >Moral Absolutism >Objectivism >Any strand of non-leftist Libertarianism >Utilitarianism >Normative moral relativism >Any strain of theism

File: 9 KB, 208x242, what a faggot.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Anonymous Sat Mar 7 19:00:25 2015 No.6238465 [Reply] [Original]

Worst/stupidest/most insane philosophies thread?

I'll start.

>Anything Nietzsche said
>Post-Structuralism
>Moral Absolutism
>Objectivism
>Any strand of non-leftist Libertarianism
>Utilitarianism
>Normative moral relativism
>Any strain of theism

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 19:02:06 2015 No.6238470 >>6238465 What is the point of this, OP? Is it your intention to create a shitstorm of a thread with no intelligible discussion? Are you happy with your life?

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 19:02:23 2015 No.6238472 Continental philosophy in general

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 19:03:37 2015 No.6238480 >Anything Nietzsche said Reality is really insane I have to admit.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 19:05:50 2015 No.6238490 ITT OP thinks that the solutions philosophers offer are more important than the issues they raise. Worst is skepticism because no one takes them seriously in both their problems and the solutions to their non-existant (kek) problems

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 19:06:00 2015 No.6238492 File: 51 KB, 499x499, smug_nietzsche.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Nietzsche goes against a lot of stuff that you listed there...

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 19:06:09 2015 No.6238494 >>6238470 My point is to mock stupid philosophers and maybe even create some constructive dialog about which philosophies are more or less valid than others. >>6238480 >reality More like whatever he wanted to be reality at any given time.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 19:06:12 2015 No.6238495 >>6238465 atheistic leftism, that's a big one

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 19:06:18 2015 No.6238496 >>6238470 butthurt that you subscribe to an insane philosophy?

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 19:09:34 2015 No.6238511 >>6238490 Questions without solutions are just speculative bullshit. >>6238492 I was obviously being facetious when I said "anything". >>6238495 There is literally nothing about those two positions that inherently contradict each other.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 19:09:38 2015 No.6238512 >>6238494 And you think unsubstantiated opinions are going to achieve that? >>6238496 Why would you say this?

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 19:11:08 2015 No.6238519 >>6238465 >anything Nietzsche said >moral absolutism Oh, so like when Nietzsche is strictly against moral absolutes? At least try to be cohesive.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 19:11:41 2015 No.6238522 It would help if you explained your objections, rather than making a list like an idiot.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 19:12:40 2015 No.6238528 >>6238511 >Questions without solutions are just speculative bullshit. So, you don't agree with asking a question that you don't know the answer to? Topkekm8

Anonymous Sat Mar 7 19:14:50 2015 No.6238534

>>6238511
Leftism: a rationalistic system born out of Christian morality

Atheism: in part, a rejection of the Christian doctrine

Where does an atheist turn to ground his leftist morals? History? Oh, massive amounts of freedom and inequality from all cultures throughout all civilization... Absolutism, some form of inherent good? Oh, the source of that, God, doesn't exist. Forms? Oh, that's rationalized discourse built around the idea that there is a value-law to the universe, i.e. God.

Leftists are secular Christians.

Anonymous Sat Mar 7 19:15:33 2015 No.6238540

>>6238512
>>6238522

I'm the one rejecting the philosophy, so the burden of proof isn't on me. If YOU want me to take those philosophies seriously, then YOU need to make arguments in favor of them.

>>6238528

Not knowing the answer doesn't mean that there isn't an answer.

My point is simply that the solution to the question is just as important (if not more so) than the question itself, which any rational person would agree with.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 19:16:26 2015 No.6238544 When will leftists realize that their moral principles, in essence, never existed in the history of Europe before Christianity showed up?

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 19:17:28 2015 No.6238548 >>6238540 The burden of proof is always on you You mean to tell me you have philosophical opinions you cannot justify? Go back to reddit

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 19:17:37 2015 No.6238549 >>6238534 >the only source of morality that favors collectivism is God You are mind-numbingly stupid. There are literally dozens of secular moral philosophical schools, nearly all of which are compatible with Leftism.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 19:18:01 2015 No.6238553 >>6238540 I'm not aiming to prove anything. I'd just like threads where the OP actually elaborates on their posts instead of just creating threads aim to be pure bait with lists containing no content.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 19:18:37 2015 No.6238556 >>6238470 >Hasn't noticed or accepted that Nietzsche is full of shit yet, so young and so mad.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 19:20:16 2015 No.6238564 >>6238540 A problem is necessary for a solution to exist. By your logic the scientists who highlighted the problem of climate change were just performing speculative bullshit. Give up.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 19:20:33 2015 No.6238565 >>6238556 Whom are you quoting?

Anonymous Sat Mar 7 19:20:46 2015 No.6238570

>>6238549
Leftism isn't mere collectivism. There are egoistic leftists and collectivist right wingers.

The idea of egalitarianism, "all souls are equal before God," is Christianity itself. Just because many do not realize the inherent relation their secular systems have to the New Testament doesn't mean they aren't contradicting themselves.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 19:21:02 2015 No.6238571 >>6238540 >I'm the one rejecting the philosophy, so the burden of proof isn't on me. this is the dumbest thing I have ever read on /lit/...

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 19:21:32 2015 No.6238575 >>6238540 Nietzsche can argue on his own behalf just fine.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 19:22:18 2015 No.6238580 ITT: people who haven't read Nietzsche.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 19:24:02 2015 No.6238588 >>6238540 >rational person top kek just drop it

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 19:28:45 2015 No.6238609 File: 119 KB, 1021x751, 1354816366901.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6238465 >>Utilitarianism puusy how did your man's balls taste in your morning coffee?

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 19:31:30 2015 No.6238617 philosophy is for intelligent people to convince themselves they're smart when they're not lol

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 19:34:05 2015 No.6238625 >>6238617 You got it, man. puffs joint

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 19:35:49 2015 No.6238630 Is Thus Spoke Zarathustra a good entrance into Nietzche?

Anonymous Sat Mar 7 19:36:56 2015 No.6238634

>>6238570
You are some special kind of poorly informed retard. Leftist 'equality' has nothing to do with Christian notions of equality.

Stalin, much as I don't like quoting him: These people evidently think that socialism calls for equalisation, for levelling the requirements and personal, everyday life of the members of society. Needless to say, such an assumption has nothing in common with Marxism, with Leninism. By equality Marxism means, not equalisation of personal requirements and everyday life, but the abolition of classes, i.e., a) the equal emancipation of all working people from exploitation after the capitalists have been overthrown and expropriated; b) the equal abolition for all of private property in the means of production after they have been converted into the property of the whole of society; c) the equal duty of all to work according to their ability, and the equal right of all working people to receive in return for this according to the work performed (socialist society); d) the equal duty of all to work according to their ability, and the equal right of all working people to receive in return for this according to their needs (communist society). Moreover, Marxism proceeds from the assumption that people’s tastes and requirements are not, and cannot be, identical and equal in regard to quality or quantity, whether in the period of socialism or in the period of communism.

There you have the Marxist conception of equality.Marxism has never recognised, and does not recognise, any other equality.

Christian style egalitarianism is nonsense.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 19:37:03 2015 No.6238635 >>6238630 It's his most difficult work.

Anonymous Sat Mar 7 19:37:43 2015 No.6238639

>>6238630
No, never ever read Zarathustra first. You are better off reading all of his other books before attempting it, or you'll get your ass handed to you by part 2.

I recommend reading chronologically. If you want to skip his early works, start with Human, All Too Human and proceed chronologically, skipping Zarathustra. Gay Science is the key text.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 19:38:46 2015 No.6238644 >>6238630 Nah, stuff like beyond good and evil, Human all too human, etc are easier and will help you understand what kind of writer Nietzsche was.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 19:38:56 2015 No.6238646 >>6238635 r u simple m8?

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 19:39:04 2015 No.6238647 >>6238617 4u

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 19:39:07 2015 No.6238648 >>6238609 pure utilitarianism is insane though. Make no mistake, utilitarian thought reaches into every single viable political philosophy, but on it's own it doesn't stand.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 19:39:25 2015 No.6238651 >>6238646 ?

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 19:40:04 2015 No.6238653 >>6238630 Genealogy of the morals is the most straighforward work of Nietzsche, and it's easy to read

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 19:40:16 2015 No.6238654 >>6238625 I'm a philosophy major btw :)

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 19:40:21 2015 No.6238655 >>6238635 >>6238639 >>6238644 Damn ok, I'll try to read it at least.

Anonymous Sat Mar 7 19:42:42 2015 No.6238663

>>6238634
Thinking that people shouldn't be exploited by others and that classes should not exist is under the banner of "Christian style egalitarianism nonsense" only applied to the earth. Show me one moral system that isn't Christianity or a similar system that was created by the ascetic, dejected and weak that is against these things.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 19:43:52 2015 No.6238666 Why does /lit/ keep giving attention to morons like this >>6238540?

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 19:44:15 2015 No.6238670 >>6238655 I mean, it's as dense as some of Kant's work, written in biblical parable and laden with symbolism. You'll get the prologue but not much else. At least read The Gay Science beforehand since that's the preface.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 19:46:29 2015 No.6238678 >>6238465 in an attempt to create some structured discussion im going to ask what is probably a dumb question. aren't moral absolutism and moral relativism opposites?

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 19:50:03 2015 No.6238688 >>6238494 >maybe even create some constructive dialog I hope this is b8. How can you expect a constructive dialog to start with arrogant shitposting?

Anonymous Sat Mar 7 19:52:20 2015 No.6238696

>>6238663
No it isn't. Morals do not factor in at all.

Private ownership of the productive forces of society is economically inefficient over long periods of time and fundamentally undermines the stability of society. Wealth disparity isn't bad because of some moralistic demand, it is bad because of the class antagonisms it produces. Private ownership isn't bad because people aren't equal to their bosses, its bad because it alienates people from the product of their labour and removes any personal investment they may have had in their job. It produces apathetic workers who only do what they must to either not get fired or get promoted.

Anonymous Sat Mar 7 19:56:29 2015 No.6238719

>>6238678
>aren't moral absolutism and moral relativism opposites?
Not OP, but I've been considering this question for a while, although not in detail, and my conclusion is that they are based on the same stance. Both take an external perspective on the world. To say that something is absolute you have to claim an absolute perspective, knowing how it Really is. To say that everything is relative, you have to do the same: position yourself outside of the world in order to not be in any position so that you can reduce everything to just another position.
But both are impossible. Whatever you say is already speaking from a certain perspective. The way you claim relativism (relative to what?! something absolute?) discloses that perspective. You can't escape it, which means you can't be a relativist. You're alway necessarily putting one perspective above some other yet you can't establish that perspective as absolute.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 19:59:12 2015 No.6238734 File: 10 KB, 297x386, aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6238465 what.

Anonymous Sat Mar 7 20:03:54 2015 No.6238752

>>6238696
>Morals do not factor in at all.
Brékkek Kékkek Kékkek Kékkek!

Morals factor into absolutely everything, everything that has a value judgement. All of Marxism rests on a value judgement: the aristocracy is bad.

I gotta go write an essay sorry bae but you ought to read some Nietzsche it could help you understand your own positions better and also make you happier with existence

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 20:06:22 2015 No.6238756 >>6238752 dank memes bro.

Anonymous Sat Mar 7 20:18:20 2015 No.6238793

>>6238465

It seems fairly clear to me from this list that you're some kind of hardline orthodox Marxist that is deeply convinced that ideas outside your 'religion' are heresy. If I'm right about this, I don't have anything to tell you.

On the off chance I'm wrong, I'll just put some words in in defense of Nietzsche.

Nietzsche has exercised an enormous influence even WITHIN the left wing paradigm you're convinced is so infallible. No Nietzsche, no Goldman, Foucault, Derrida, Adorno, Deleuze, Weber, Sartre, or Rorty. So a good chunk of 20th left wing thought is not conceivable without Nietzsche, even if you think he's a proto-Randian (which he's not but whatever).

So you're going around hating on this philsopher who has been cited as an influence by people who are WAY SMARTER THAN you and yet you seem to think that you can conveniently just dismiss him as a teenaged fad. Do you realize what an asshole you look like?

Sorry about the ad hom but everything about your behavior ITT points toward you being a shitty human being.

OK, since I know you're not just going to take my word for that, I'll give you a few examples of why you suck:

1. You're not smart.

You are not intelligent because you can't even grasp the meaning of the burden of proof. Calling a philosophy "insane" is not the same as merely rejecting it. That's a positive claim. When you make a claim like that, the burden of proof is on you. In other words, you don't even understand the burden of proof, a basic argumentation 101 concept. All signs point to you being a dumbass.

2. Even though you're really dumb, you have this sense of deep conviction that you must be correct.

Just look at the vitriol you've spewed ITT. Calling your interlocutors "mind numbingly stupid," "young and mad," and so on. And yet you don't even understand the burden of proof. Do you realize how unpleasant it is to be called a retard by a retard? Imagine if someone stuck you in a room with a drooling retard who kept questioning your decisions. That's what it's like when someone who is actually smart reads something written by you.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 20:22:02 2015 No.6238810 Stupid college undergrad arrogantism is the worst

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 20:24:56 2015 No.6238819 >>6238810 inb4 OP makes another retarded comment that means literally nothing while thinking he's pwning souls. Guy's a fucking joke. A sad, sad, sad, SAD joke.

Anonymous Sat Mar 7 20:29:45 2015 No.6238833

>>6238752
>Morals factor into absolutely everything, everything that has a value judgement.
value judgments are not necessarily morals. what about aesthetics? and morals are based on right/wrong opposition while value judgments can be a thing of degrees or even of qualitative differences that can't be subsumed under a single scale or opposition

Anonymous Sat Mar 7 20:35:06 2015 No.6238852

>>6238833

I think morals are sort of derived from values. Once you value something, then suddenly, actions can be considered objectively right or wrong, because certain actions undeniably contribute to and promote that value more. I think--I'm not totally sure, it's just a pet theory--that this is what secretly underlies the idea of objective morality. The idea is, certain things are valued so universally (health, the prosperity of society, not being murdered) that those who don't share these values are practically in the realm of abnormal psych. Hence, morals derived from these values are almost objectively grounded. So while there's no objective morality on the highest conceptual levels, it's kind of like there is in practice.

Anonymous Sat Mar 7 20:35:32 2015 No.6238854

>>6238793

Not OP, but Nietzsche's philosophy is so edgy and Fascistic that anyone with an even rudimentary understanding of morality or basic human decency can see why it's bullshit.

Justifying the abuse and the exploitation of the weak and defenseless is not philosophy; it's sociopathy.

Anonymous Sat Mar 7 20:40:30 2015 No.6238864

>>6238752

>he actually thinks Marx was basing his system off of Christian ethics

First of all, Marx's contention was that Communism is inevitable. Whether you agree with that position or not, it is obvious that it isn't a value judgement and is instead a prediction.

Second of all, Marx DID support Communism, but that justification came from a scientific and economic analysis; NOT a moral analysis.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 20:40:48 2015 No.6238866 File: 104 KB, 384x797, 1425622634529.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] What in particular do you find stupid and why?

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 20:43:15 2015 No.6238880 >>6238854 You don't understand Nietzsche if you think he advocated for "abusing and exploitation of the weak"

Anonymous Sat Mar 7 20:44:59 2015 No.6238888

>all these people defending Nietzsche

for fuck's sake, give it up.

he was a sexist, authoritarian pseudo-intellectual who based his arguments entirely off of emotion (while pretending to be some sort of enlightened hyper-rational being) and his philosophy single-handedly gave rise to fascism and, by extension, a war that killed millions.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 20:46:06 2015 No.6238893 >>6238880 He literally said that the weak deserve any abuse or mistreatment they get for not being as strong as their masters. Seriously. This isn't even an argument.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 20:46:22 2015 No.6238894 >>6238854 >he hasn't read The Dawn where Nietzsche vehemently criticizes capitalism as dehumanizing

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 20:47:22 2015 No.6238898 >>6238893 Do you not understand he was at a core level, a perspectivist?

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 20:48:26 2015 No.6238900 >>6238893 It's more nuanced than a social darwinism. By weak, he is mostly applying this to nihilists. Once you realize this his philosophy is a lot less edgy.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 20:48:42 2015 No.6238901 Am I the only one who thinks Nietzsche reads like something a really high IQ Hedda Gabler at the top of a manic episode would write?

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 20:48:51 2015 No.6238903 >>6238894 Plenty of Fascist pricks have been anti-capitalist. Doesn't change the fact that they advocate for oppression, war, chaotic human relationships, and a complete disregard for empathy, compassion, or altruism. Just like Nietzsche.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 20:49:20 2015 No.6238907 >>6238854 The edgiest thing about Nietzsche was his critique of Christian morals. Terms like will-to-power and übermensch only seem superficially edgy.

Anonymous Sat Mar 7 20:50:50 2015 No.6238908

>>6238903
He was for oppression because he saw it as a necessary step in society's development, similar to accelerationists. That is, he wasn't so much as for it, but saw it as inevitable in his analysis, but then saw it as eventually leading to something far higher.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 20:51:24 2015 No.6238909 >>6238903 Nietzsche has no problem with compassion or empathy, are you high? he has a problem with Christian style pity.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 20:52:50 2015 No.6238914 >>6238907 Christian morals are not very Christ-like. While Nietzsche critiques Tertullian for waxing about the joy that Christians will have in watching the sinners suffer and burn in hell for eternity, Nietzsche has qualified praise for Christ himself.

Anonymous Sat Mar 7 20:54:35 2015 No.6238917

Nietzsche advocates creative approach to life. Weakness is not equal to being socially less privileged - it means not being able to affirm and intensify life which usually applies to people that are more privileged since they are more often than not conservative in order to keep their privilege.

Any worship of becoming is going to side with what is marginal and untimely, because that is what escapes the fixed and existing structures.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 20:55:02 2015 No.6238919 File: 23 KB, 300x300, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] post-structuralism is based

Anonymous Sat Mar 7 20:55:31 2015 No.6238923

>>6238854

Nobody who reads Nietzsche these days actually accepts his normative project. It's all about his insights into the nature of religion, values, power relations and truth, that people are interested in these days. I don't think you'll find any left-leaning fan of Nietzsche going around saying, "oh yeah, that Ubermensch thing, great stuff." Most scholars generally agree that the normative side of Nietzsche's project failed. His insights are still fucking bad-ass though and if you can't read someone's work and appreciate it without needing to approve of it morally, you're not an adult.

I also think your claim about his normative project is false. Don't get me wrong, Nietzsche's politics are undeniably reactionary, but saying he's "justifying the abuse and exploitation of the wear and defenseless" is a misrepresentation of what he said. There are plenty of allusions in Nietzsche's writings to the idea that the strongest society would be free from all forms of authoritarian control and "taming" of human beings by oppressive means. His conception of this is different from liberal values of course. To the liberal, you shouldn't abuse those weaker than you because it violates some universal moral edict. To nietzsche, the strong should not persecute the weak, because it's pathetic, disgraceful, and actually weak behavior in itself. He specifically said this in reference to the persecutions of the Christians and related ideas are expressed all throughout his writings.

Anonymous Sat Mar 7 20:56:29 2015 No.6238926

>>6238864
I didn't mean to imply Marx was conscious of it. Most people aren't conscious that their secular morals are in fact Christian morals. What's Marx's quote on ideology, something like "they do not realize what they do but they are still doing it"? Yeah, that applied to himself.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 20:56:54 2015 No.6238927 >>6238923 >Nietzsche's politics are undeniably reactionary Only if Futurism is too.

ΟΥΤΙΣ Sat Mar 7 20:59:09 2015 No.6238932

>>6238926
>Christianity invented populism
Are you fucking stoned? Christianity spread because it was a populist religion, but populism existed a long fucking time before Christianity. And Christianity ceased to be populist when it became the religion of the state.

Anonymous Sat Mar 7 21:04:45 2015 No.6238945

>>6238888

Naziism was an outgrowth of the anti-semitic German nationalist movement which Nietzsche explicitly criticized and rejected again, and again, and again. Yes, they did cite Nietzsche's work, but the idea that Nietzsche was the main inspiration for any of this is ridiculous. Anti-semitism in Germany was at ludicrous levels even in the mid 1800s, there's actually a passage in one of Nietzsche's letters when he talks about retarded anti-semites going around "Sieg Heiling" and being retarded in German cities. Nietzsche was one of the first major intellectuals to call these proto-nazis out for their bullshit. But keep on talking about how Nietzsche "single handedly" inspired Naziism. I'm waiting for your armchair psychoanalytical opinion on how his breakdown was caused by his own philosophy or how he was a closet case.

Anonymous Sat Mar 7 21:05:10 2015 No.6238948
File: 13 KB, 445x287, a0103976_4a86c0e8b33bf.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>When an exceptional human being handles the mediocre more gently than he does himself or his equals, this is not mere politeness of the heart - it is simply his duty . . . Whom among today's rabble do I hate the most? The Socialist rabble, the Chandala apostles who undermine the worker's instinct, his pleasure, his feeling of contentment with his little state of being - who makes him envious, who teach him revengefulness... Injustice never lies in unequal rights, it lies in the claim to 'equal' rights ... What is bad? But I have already answered that question: everything that proceeds from weakness, from envy, from revengefulness. -- The anarchist and the Christian have a common origin.

Antichrist, section 57

Just in case anyone wanted to actually read Nietzsche's thoughts and realize he thinks the higher men should be kind to the mediocre, still finding socialism problematic.

Anonymous Sat Mar 7 21:06:15 2015 No.6238951

>>6238907
>>6238908
>>6238909
>>6238914
>>6238917
>>6238923

>lol hurting people weaker than me is so COOL and AWESOME and BADASS, Nietzsche is my hero, I'm the fucking UBERMENSCH

I hate people who like this guy so fucking much.

Sociopathy is not cool. It's disgusting and you're disgusting for trying to justify it because you happen to like his writing style.

Anonymous Sat Mar 7 21:07:32 2015 No.6238959

>>6238932
Of course Christ didn't invent it, but the populist moral thread that infected all European philosophers like Kant and Marx had a Christian origin, therefore I feel myself to be reasonable in claiming that Marx operated on Christian morals. I said "Christianity or a similar system that was created by the ascetic, dejected and weak that is against these things.">>6238663

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 21:08:33 2015 No.6238965 >>6238951 see>>6238948

Anonymous Sat Mar 7 21:10:25 2015 No.6238969

>>6238965

That post doesn't refute anything I said.

He views the striving for fairness, quality, and compassion to stem from "weakness". He thinks the strong should trample over the weak, because it is their natural "right" to do so. He is advocating Fascism.

Anonymous Sat Mar 7 21:12:05 2015 No.6238972

>>6238927
Eh, I think you can argue for a sort-of humanistic interpretation of Nietzsche's political views but A) it's a bit of a stretch, and B) even with this interpretation the type of humanism that's found occasionally in NIetzsche is quite unorthodox and definitely not bound to satisfy the privilege checking set. It's an argument I frankly don't have the energy to make, the other side probably wouldn't accept it no matter how eloquently I stated it, and overall the whole thing just isn't worth it. These people who hate Nietzsche have an instinctive revulsion toward his philosophy, this isn't something I'm going to overcome in a debate on 4chan so I'm just sticking to the most obvious points to try to make these guys look like idiots to anyone else who is reading this.

Anonymous Sat Mar 7 21:15:32 2015 No.6238985

>>6238972

We have an instinctive revulsion toward it because we're not hyper-conservative fucktards who have no understanding of empathy.

I bet you actually think Tyler Durden raised some valid points in Fight Club, you stupid fucking edgy fourteen year old.

Violence and oppression are not "cool", you fucking morons. They are depraved, barbaric, animalistic, and beyond contemptible. The goal of humanity should be to smash these malicious and psycopathic power structures and liberate themselves from the disgusting depravity of the people who try to force their will on those around them.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 21:18:03 2015 No.6238988 >>6238985 >things you own end up owning you you have all the time in the world to refute this quote by tyler durden a fictional character created by chuck fucking palahniuk

ΟΥΤΙΣ Sat Mar 7 21:18:43 2015 No.6238989

>>6238959
>the populist moral thread that infected all European philosophers like Kant and Marx had a Christian origin
The Enlightenment was a product of nostalgia over the ancients, friend, including Greek democracy and Roman republicanism.

>For the ancient Greeks, the Phrygian cap indicates non-Greek "barbarism" (in the classical sense).[1]

Anonymous Sat Mar 7 21:19:46 2015 No.6238991

>>6238969
Why must equality and compassion be linked to one another? Why does an order of rank necessarily entail "trampling", instead of a compassion for the less powerful while acknowledging a certain degree of control?

A fascist abstracts the State and makes it into an ideology all must serve. This is clearly something Nietzsche does not do. Nietzsche influenced fascism, but also influenced anarchism, Zionism, and communism (some Bolshevik liked Zarathustra, forget which one). To put Nietzsche under one of these 20th century ideologies is futile. He cannot easily be adapted to a political ideology.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 21:20:17 2015 No.6238992 OP you really don't need to try this hard to be a faggot. Sucking cocks was enough.

Anonymous Sat Mar 7 21:22:59 2015 No.6239003

>>6238991

You can't have true compassion for someone who you deem to be below you. You can, at most, have some sort of condescending pity.

Why do you (and so many people in this thread) have such a strong affinity for authoritarianism? Are you actually deluding yourself into thinking that you are "strong" enough to become one of the rulers in such a society?

Anonymous Sat Mar 7 21:23:26 2015 No.6239006

>>6238969
>He views the striving for fairness, quality, and compassion to stem from "weakness"

He does think that the slave morality originates from a certain type of weakness, but he also says that this brand of morality is much more intelligent and "interesting" than master morality, which he refers to as being a product of boring, uninteresting and frankly slightly stupid people. He also says that every society will have a synthesis of both types of morality, and that the common people are entirely right, and within their rights, to use slave morality and as an effective political tool. He also regards the triumph of this type of morality as the ultimate success story in the history of moral theory and that the "masters" undeniably lost the argument. Now I know what you're going to say... "Oooooh but the rhetoric he uses, you can tell that beneath all his superficial even handedness he's chomping back a secret hard on for the masters that he can barely hide." Here, I'd just point out that his ideal is the renaissance. Nowhere in his writings did he ever engage in apologetics for mere degenerate tyrants like the Tsars of Russia or the german nationalists. He favored the type of cultural dynamism of the renaissance because of its energy and creativity and vitality and its acceptance of free thought. He would have despised Naziism and Stalinism unreservedly.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 21:23:54 2015 No.6239007 >>6238985 Except there isn't any other structure that's not a power structure and power isn't automatically malicious/oppressive.

Anonymous Sat Mar 7 21:28:34 2015 No.6239015

>>6239003
>You can't have true compassion for someone who you deem to be below you.
Parents...?

>Why do you (and so many people in this thread) have such a strong affinity for authoritarianism? Are you actually deluding yourself into thinking that you are "strong" enough to become one of the rulers in such a society?

No, I'd gladly be ruled by a strong leader who is not held down by either weakness nor egoism.

>>6238989
They still found Christianity's tenderness to be more agreeable than the values of paganism. But there were Enlightenment leaders and thinkers all over spectrum and there's no real point in talking about "their" values, which is why I specifically chose Kant and Marx.

Anonymous Sat Mar 7 21:29:10 2015 No.6239016

>>6239006

The fuck are you talking about? Nietzsche CLEARLY favored Master morality over Slave morality. His entire fucking premise was that Master morality stems from strength, force, and will (all things that he admired) and Slave morality stemmed from understanding, empathy, and caution (all things that he despised).

You're being a revisionist.

Anonymous Sat Mar 7 21:31:16 2015 No.6239022

>>6238985
Dude, fucking listen to yourself. You're unhinged. Do you actually believe every person ITT who is defending Nietzsche is some crypto-fascist "uber conservative" who's just waiting for the first opportunity go out and rape and murder people? Like seriously? This moral outrage you're expressing is pretty peculiar considering that virtually everyone in here is saying "your interpretation of Nietzsche is incorrect," not "no, you TOTALLY UNDERSTAND WHAT HE'S SAYING we just REALLY, REALLY, REALLY LIKE VIOLENCE AND OPPRESSION."

I read your posts and I sometimes find it difficult to believe my eyes, it's like you're not even reading what people are saying and are just responding to some imaginary uber fascist poster who's going on about how he wants to kill children or something.

Anonymous Sat Mar 7 21:32:02 2015 No.6239024

>>6239007

Those two statements are both hilariously untrue and reveal your infantile reactionary moral compass.

>>6239015

>parents

They view their children as "equals", in the sense that they have the same value as human beings. Rulers don't view the ruled as possessing the same value.

Also, YOUR desire to be ruled like a farm animal doesn't reflect on the rest of society, nor should it.

>>	ΟΥΤΙΣ Sat Mar 7 21:32:11 2015 No.6239026 >>6239015 >They still found Christianity's tenderness to be more agreeable than the values of paganism Ancient populists were pagan, stupid.

Anonymous Sat Mar 7 21:34:18 2015 No.6239029

>>6239022

I have never heard a single person defend Nietzsche who doesn't display a profound lack of empathy, compassion, or civility. Nietzsche objectively promoted violence, authority, and competitive destruction. Therefore, I think my assumptions about the posters in this thread are perfectly valid.

Anonymous Sat Mar 7 21:34:31 2015 No.6239031

>>6239016
>Nietzsche CLEARLY favored Master morality over Slave morality.

Nope. There's thousands and thousands of scholarly words about the exact opposite. I just wrote my term paper about this topic.

This is basically the point of interpretation where one either finds Nietzsche to be a barbaristic fascist or a nuanced and complex writer.

The most clear example for the position that he was in favor of a third type of morality is (other than the phrase "Transvaluation of all values" - ALL hitherto values) is the Three Metamorphoses parable in Zarathustra:

Camel - Slave
Lion - Master reappearing in a slave state
Child - Ubermensch

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 21:37:11 2015 No.6239036 >>6239024 he said he would prefer being governed by a competent leader instead of someone appointed by popular election which you seem to register as 'being ruled like a farm animal' you're only pretending to argue this is not a fucking sport

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 21:37:26 2015 No.6239037 >>6239024 >Those two statements are both hilariously untrue and reveal your infantile reactionary moral compass. If you have a society in mind that isn't made up of power structures please tell me.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 21:37:41 2015 No.6239038 >>6239026 Not populist in the sense of no class system, though. >>6239029 No one cares about your experience with goth kid from your high school that misread nietzsche

Anonymous Sat Mar 7 21:40:01 2015 No.6239046

>>6239031

His "third type" was, in actuality, a self-aware Master morality.

Literally his only objection to Master morality is that it was focused on self-sustaining, rather than self-improving. However, he viewed "improvement" as "stomping on others while forcing your own values on the rest of society"; he did, after all, greatly admire Napoleon.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 21:42:26 2015 No.6239048 >>6239036 Being opposed to democracy is inherently authoritarian, violent, and barbaric, which just proves my point that the people who defend Nietzsche are fucking animalistic and edgy brutes. >>6239037 Literally ANY non-Statist Leftist philosophy.

>>	ΟΥΤΙΣ Sat Mar 7 21:43:26 2015 No.6239050 >>6239038 >Not populist in the sense of no class system, though. Euphron turned the slaves into citizens, that's as functionally close to abolishing class as economic conditions of that period could permit.

Anonymous Sat Mar 7 21:44:36 2015 No.6239052

>>6239016

Throughout Nietzsche's later writings, he consistently says that slave morality is more potent and effective than master morality. He said that "they form a more powerful force than any group frankly saying 'yes' to life." I really doubt he completely missed the fact that to say this is to acknowledge a strength and power to slave morality itself, considering that his whole thesis in the first essay of the genealogy of morals is that slave morality completely won the argument in antiquity and master morality got BTFO.

As for his preference for master morality, you need to understand it IN CONTEXT. It's part of a whole package, he wants life-affirmation, free thinking, artistic creation, skepticism, iconoclasm all rolled up in one--essentially he wants Renaissance-like values. He doesn't endorse mere barbarism, he wants this "life affirming" master energy to be directed towards a purpose. If he was a fanboy of just any old barbarian, why didn't he like the anti-semites and german nationalists? Sure they were macho men, but Nietzsche hated them because they were retards. I mean if he really was as bad as you say he is, he had every opportunity to show it. He could have supported the reactionary movements in his day, but instead he bashed them. Why, if he was fascist, was he against all the proto-fascists operating in Germany at the time of his writing? This seems like a pretty fucking serious problem for your position.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 21:45:19 2015 No.6239053 >>6239048 itt: if i present my opinions with exaggerated machismo people will look the other way nope

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 21:47:08 2015 No.6239055 >>6238540 >I'm the one rejecting the philosophy, so the burden of proof isn't on me. If YOU want me to take those philosophies seriously, then YOU need to make arguments in favor of them. You're out of your mind. pls go

Anonymous Sat Mar 7 22:46:11 2015 No.6239061

>>6239046
His third type finds the life-promoting ideals in master morality agreeable, but not the whole of it. He obviously has no need for the brutal civilization-forming aspects of it that you're so afraid of. He greatly admired the abstract "Caesar", he was mixed on Napoleon.

_All_ of his comments on politics and morality "concern [him] solely for the sake of a goal" (GM preface sec. 5) which is avoiding and destroying nihilism. Therefore, life-affirming aspects found in both moralities are of use to him. For instance, he found the Jews admirable even though they were operating on slave morality, a lot more admirable than the Christians, and he calls the ancient Jews the strongest race of humans in The Antichrist iirc.

>>6239048
This is what we called "pure ideology," folks.

>>6239050
Was Euphron that influential to the Enlightenment, did his contemporaries like him, and were his ideals similar to Christianity or Marxism? I'm not being rhetorical.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 22:57:43 2015 No.6239082 >>6239052 >>6239061 >continuously calling a guy who advocated for an elitist, aristocratic social structure "life-affirming" top lel

Anonymous Sat Mar 7 22:58:52 2015 No.6239083

In the interest of not going back and forth with this anti-Nietzsche guy I guess I'll try to sum up my views on Nietzsche here in this post.

The entire anti-Nietzsche case, to me, seems built on a 'straw man of exaggeration.' There is nobody who has read Nietzsche who will deny he said some fucking edgy shit. Yes, he was famously anti-democratic, but remember... he was anti basically everything that came before him. He hated nationalism every bit as much as he hated democracy.

But I've digressed a little bit. Back to the 'straw man of exaggeration.' Yes, there is a certain kernel of truth in what you're saying. But you blow this so far out of proportion it's not even funny. If your hysterical rants are to be believed, then every tract where Nietzsche talks about master and slave morality would be some big rant where he says master morality is awesome and slave morality sucks. Except that's not what actually ends up happening. He always gives due credit to slave morality: its practitioners are more interesting, more intelligent, more human and they have BTFO the advocates of master morality in virtue every open debate between the two schools of thought.

Now, given this, why does he still seem to have a certain enthusiasm for master morality? Why, after assigning slave morality such lofty titles as the morality of the intelligent and interesting people of the world, as opposed to the foolish dullards of master morality, does he still have a certain clear enthusiasm for master morality?

It's because he advocates one very, very, very specific flavor of master morality. It has to be the master morality of the renaissance variety, where the masters are daring, free thinking artists and leaders who push the boundaries in the arts and culture, and would never dream of descending to such pathetic behavior as persecuting someone. Hence, his rejection of German nationalists and anti-semites.

If Nietzsche really was this Hitler meets Satan type figure you all claim, why doesn't he support any of the proto-fascist movements that were operating in Germany when he was writing. If he really was a fascist, there were plenty of movements he could have dove into with glee: anti-semitism, german nationalism, and so on. Why did he reject all of them?

Now you could come back to this by saying "well that's just because he favored a different type of fascism," but it seems to me that nationalism is pretty fucking central to fascism and free thinking is an Anathema to it.

This is what I'm getting at when I accuse you of "straw man of exaggeration." You take this philsophy that has all these layers of nuance and which has so many subtleties, and you condemn is as "fascist" because you read an out of context quote here or there that made you freak out and shit your pants because it was a bit sardonic and edgy. It's just very bad intellectual conduct that you guys are engaging in.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 23:00:39 2015 No.6239088 >>6238888 Do you know, let's say, anything about the history of World War II? Like, have you read any thorough histories on the subject, that weren't mere middle school textbooks? Cause, grrl, dis shit's fuckin dumb

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 23:01:42 2015 No.6239092 >>6238893 QUOTE QUOTE QUOTE WHERE DID HE SAY IT

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 23:03:51 2015 No.6239103 >>6238951 lulz stupid subhuman

Anonymous Sat Mar 7 23:08:32 2015 No.6239114

>>6239083

Rejecting morality in favor of some sort of weird ultra-emotional elitist authoritarianism has historically never had good results. For instance, it's what the National Syndicalists and later the Fascists did. In support of this, Mussolini was famously obsessed with Nietzsche's work, so his Fascist movement very well could have been a valid interpretation of whatever the fuck Nietzsche was trying to convey in his syphilis-laced rants. I don't think it's totally unreasonable for one to make the case for Mussolini as the Overman.

That, combined with Nietzsche's cringy romanticizing of violence and raw power lead to people (understandably) finding him to be somewhat repulsive.

Anonymous Sat Mar 7 23:14:16 2015 No.6239132

>>6239114
Eh, you still don't seem willing to address the details of what I'm saying. I get the sense you've more or less "made up your mind" on this one and won't hear anything against it. But man, what 20th century movement, intellectual or political, hasn't been influenced by Nietzsche? His fingerprints are all over all of it. The fascists had a big dose of Nietzsche but also a huge dose of nationalism, conformity and a general opposition to free thought and skepticism--these things are not Nietzschean.

Anonymous Sat Mar 7 23:21:06 2015 No.6239157

>>6239132

You can't seriously expect me to accept Nietzsche's philosophy just because he wasn't AS bad as the Fascists.

You are really insane if you want me to like a guy who did the following things,

>Glorify violent conflict and military leaders
>Reject democracy, equality, and basically anything that has to do with freedom while still (nonsensically) praising personal freedom
>Claim that some humans are entitled to rule over others by virtue of their heritage
>Dismiss all altruism and generosity as the morality of a slave
>Say that there's no such thing as a morally reprehensible act

Sorry, I can't get on board with that. I've never sympathized with reactionaries. All useful human endeavors have historically and irrefutably come from progressives.

Anonymous Sat Mar 7 23:25:32 2015 No.6239169

>>6239157
>while still (nonsensically) praising personal freedom
read twilight of the idols sections on freedom and egoism, he divides them in two
>by virtue of their heritage
citation needed
>Dismiss all altruism and generosity as the morality of a slave
Objectively false, read >>6238948
>Say that there's no such thing as a morally reprehensible act
>What is bad? what proceeds from weakness

Also, he didn't have syphilis. They think he had a brain tumor. Your information and position on this man is no different from an angry anti-German Englishman in the first half of the 20th. Become educated.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 23:26:30 2015 No.6239170 >>6239157 You're going to have to start quoting; Nieztsche supporters have a leas provided one, which does not say what you want it to say. Evidence or stfu.

Anonymous Sat Mar 7 23:29:51 2015 No.6239177

>>6239169
>>6239170

>WAAAAAAAHHHH, HE DOESN'T ACCEPT NIETZSCHE'S EDGY BULLSHIT WITHOUT QUESTION, WAAAAHHHH

He is not some sort of infallible God. He was a philosopher, and a bad one at that.

Stop citing his ideas as if they are proof that my worldview is incorrect. Nietzsche disagreeing with me about morality does not make me wrong. It makes me a decent human being.

Anonymous Sat Mar 7 23:32:02 2015 No.6239189

>>6238793
This.

Marxism is the worst. Its the nadir of all thought. It's intellectual appeal is for kids and celebrities. It's very core is a kind of Faux-altruism that would make even the Pope blush. When I meet someone who takes Marxism seriously I know that this isn't a serious someone. This is a child. A child who has had their own horseshit indulged for far too long.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 23:35:00 2015 No.6239196 >>6239189 >a reactionary complaining about immaturity lol The most immature thing a person can advocate is a system of rulers enforced by coercive violence. It is the pinnacle of "stop liking what I don't like".

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 23:37:09 2015 No.6239200 >>6239177 Alright, I'll criticize your retarded worldview. Let's start with the basics Define "decent human being"

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 23:39:01 2015 No.6239209 >>6239177 I'm not telling you you're wrong, I'm simply telling you that Nietzsche didn't think the things you say he thinks

Anonymous Sat Mar 7 23:40:24 2015 No.6239212

>>6239157

>>6239157
You can't seriously expect me to accept Marx's philosophy just because he wasn't AS bad as the Stalinists.

You are really insane if you want me to like a guy who did the following things,

> Considered slavery a necessary factor in economic progress.
> Categorically reject the idea of human rights and anything to do with freedom.
> Claim that some humans are entitled to rule over others by virtue of hocus pocus dialectical materialism.
> Cynically reject all altruism and generosity as mere reformist efforts, cock-blocking real progress which exists only in proletarian dictatorships without human rights.
> Call for the abolition of the family.

inb4 Marx didn't actually say [X]

Nor did Nietzsche say half the stuff you're putting in his mouth.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 23:40:47 2015 No.6239214 >>6239200 >decent human being Someone who is capable of feeling empathy, compassion, and respect for their fellow man. >>6239209 You're telling me this because you're trying to convince me that Nietzsche is right.

Anonymous Sat Mar 7 23:43:38 2015 No.6239225

>>6239212

My general impression of Nietzsche is correct. I may have gotten a few details wrong, but my overall interpretation of his main ideas is correct.

Just like Marx ultimately advocated for the liberation of the working class, Nietzsche ultimately advocated for a small portion of human beings to enforce their supposed "superiority" on the rest of us.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 23:46:02 2015 No.6239238 >>6238793 I'm going to use this as a copypasta on this board, hehe. captcha: lexam

Anonymous Sat Mar 7 23:46:51 2015 No.6239243

>>6239177

Um, hey there guy! You gonna address what was actually stated or asked after? Namely, evidence that Nietzsche holds the positions you attribute to him? Or do Marxists just have an awful time hearing what others are saying with all of society's dicks stuck in their ears?

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 23:48:26 2015 No.6239247 >>6239225 I guarantee you that you have no idea how to read Nietzsche.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 23:48:34 2015 No.6239248 >>6239243 Honestly, why should I waste my time with people who think that "Might makes right" is a valid and even ideal perspective to have?

Anonymous Sat Mar 7 23:50:24 2015 No.6239250

>>6239214
Sure, I'm capable of those things, and I engage in them 55% of the time. More often than not, i fit that category. However the other 45% of the time, when my own personal freedom is on the line, I choose that freedom over "being a decent human being" (and keep in mind, what one person considers as decency, could even be considered the opposite, given the right circumstances.)

Who are you to tell me I must sacrifice freedom for the sake of your ideology? Is that not injustice? Would I still be a decent human being if I act that way the majority of the time?

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 23:51:13 2015 No.6239252 >>6239248 Either the greatest troll on /lit/ at the moment (VERY POSSIBLE), or just straight up fell-down-all-the-flights-of-stairs retarded. I'm going with the former. Shit's entertaining.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 23:51:40 2015 No.6239253 >>6239250 Rather, how often must I act like a" decent human being" to be considered one?

Anonymous Sat Mar 7 23:51:54 2015 No.6239254

>>6239214
>Someone who is capable of feeling empathy, compassion, and respect for their fellow man.

Can you let me in on some things you do that show these traits? I'm not saying it's impossible that you possess them but it seems unlikely. I find that people who are venomous, self righteous, insulting and dishonest in discussion, are usually shitty people in other ways too. Am I really supposed to believe that after you finish condemning anyone who likes Nietzsche's philosophy as some kind of disgusting monster, you go out and become a totally decent, caring person in your day to day life? I'm questioning it man. In all that I can gather from your disposition you seem to have a fuckton of pretty detestable traits: closed-mindedness, dishonesty, quickness to insult, etc. You might think this is justified because Nietzsche is JUST THAT BAD, but come the fuck on, the idea that most people who read Nietzsche are fascists or apologists for fascism is fucking ridiculous.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 23:52:06 2015 No.6239255 >>6238465 The most creatively bankrupt failure of a troll attempt I've ever witnessed on this entire site for the past 9 years.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 23:52:29 2015 No.6239259 philosophy general thread on /pol/ if anyone's interested: >>>/pol/42270675

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 7 23:55:19 2015 No.6239267 >>6239255 It's not a troll attempt. This guy really does seem to have a passionate hatred for Nietzsche.

Anonymous Sat Mar 7 23:57:23 2015 No.6239273

>>6239250

Personal freedom and empathy are not incompatible. If you think they are, you are delusional.

>>6239252

I'm sorry that my opposition to Fascism is seen as so alien and unbelievable to you.

>>6239254

I have never hurt, harmed, or attacked another human being in my life. I am ALWAYS courteous and polite, even to people who I personally find to be unlikable. I am relatively open-minded and rarely will I judge someone to be a bad person.

I just STRONGLY feel that Nietzsche's philosophy represents the worst, most destructive characteristics of humanity and I am completely repulsed and disgusted that so many people actually admire such a depraved individual.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 00:04:24 2015 No.6239299 >>6239267 Nah, this is totes a troll. Look at how vague and general they're being. No specific Marxist or Nietzschean theses are being put forward; at most, just whatever someone can glean off of Wikipedia.

Anonymous Sun Mar 8 00:05:32 2015 No.6239302

>>6239273

>I have never hurt, harmed, or attacked another human being in my life. I am ALWAYS courteous and polite, even to people who I personally find to be unlikable. I am relatively open-minded and rarely will I judge someone to be a bad person.
>I just STRONGLY feel that Nietzsche's philosophy represents the worst, most destructive characteristics of humanity and I am completely repulsed and disgusted that so many people actually admire such a depraved individual.

See? COMEDY.

Anonymous Sun Mar 8 00:07:57 2015 No.6239308

>>6239302

No, you misunderstand. Nietzsche and his thugs are the exception, not the rule.

Like, if someone disagrees with me on the issue of Statism, I might find their idea to be morally flawed, but I don't find the individual to be morally flawed. If, however, they propose the idea that some members of our society are inferior and deserve to be treated as inferior, then I WILL judge them, because I don't believe that a good person could hold such a worldview.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 00:08:57 2015 No.6239317 people actually fell for this bait

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 00:10:05 2015 No.6239319 >>6239308 See guys? A real knee-slapper, this one!

Anonymous Sun Mar 8 00:12:51 2015 No.6239330

>>6239273
>I am completely repulsed and disgusted that so many people actually admire such a depraved individual.

Well, let me put it to you like this.

You are aware that Nietzsche has a reception on the left, right? His entire following isn't made up of insane reactionaries. I'm positive that if you have an interest in 20th century philosophy you are a fan of some philosopher who was influenced by Nietzsche, whether you know it or not.

So there are two possible scenarios here:

1. All these left wing Nietzsche fans are just deluded.

2. They're actually crypto-fascists hiding behind progressive causes in Machiavellian fashion.

or

3. There's something in Nietzsche you're not seeing.

Now, I think I can guess which of these explanations YOU favor. But in defense of the third, I'll submit this much. What if a progressive project is actually aided by understanding the dynamic between oppressors and the oppressed at a deep level? What if this ideologically mandated veil of righteous indignation around anything to do with power actually keeps us in the dark as to its nature, how it operates, and on what terms it might finally fall? What if all this moralizing at power is actually counterproductive to the cause of undermining it? Progressive projects have been going on in one form or another for 2000+ years now, and they have a pretty good track record of getting co-opted by reactionary elements in the end. I'd say there's at least some basis for trying a different approach, even if it means we might entertain some ideas proposed by some guy who we consider depraved.

Philosophies don't have to be dogmatically "followed," they can be "used," without respecting the intentions of the original philosopher.

Anonymous Sun Mar 8 00:13:57 2015 No.6239335

>>6239317
>>6239319

Stop this fucking absurd raving about me joking or trolling.

Nietzsche advocated for a philosophy that almost solely launched Fascism, Social Darwinism, and Objectivism. His work is filled with hatred, disdain, and contempt for virtually all member of the human race who he didn't perceive to be as "enlightened" as himself. He tried to keep the aristocracy alive. He was a fucking MONSTER, on par with Herbert Spencer or even Mussolini.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 00:14:25 2015 No.6239338 >>6239225 you either don't understand Nietzsche, or you're trolling hard.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 00:15:34 2015 No.6239341 >>6239335 getting a bit more obvious lad

Anonymous Sun Mar 8 00:17:29 2015 No.6239345

>>6239335

I don't know; it's like, I'd expect that someone serious would have actually read Nietzsche instead of a silly strawman Nietzsche that's been refuted since Walter Kaufmann's work on him in the 50s.

Either which way, keep going! This shit's HILARIOUS!

You could maybe use some more meme jokes tho, admittedly.

Anonymous Sun Mar 8 00:17:46 2015 No.6239347

>>6239330

The members of the Left who enjoy Nietzsche's work are indoctrinated by our competitive capitalist social Darwinist culture. We living in a hedonistic time that favors status and power over decency or virtue and it SHOWS in who we hold up as our ideals.

Also, I refuse to use a philosophy I don't believe in to advance my own cause. That is beyond manipulative and misanthropic.

Anonymous Sun Mar 8 00:22:17 2015 No.6239355

>>6239338
>>6239341
>>6239345

Shut the fuck up, you stupid fucking hivemind-like morons.

Contrary to what you may believe, it IS possible to reject our vapid consumerist culture that has led to the direct death of millions and to instead embrace positivity, altruism, charity, freedom, cooperation, and peacefulness.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 00:24:04 2015 No.6239362 >>6239355 getting a bit more obvious lad

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 00:24:26 2015 No.6239365 >>6238465 idk man, that mustache is pretty dank

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 00:25:54 2015 No.6239371 File: 257 KB, 516x526, 1409630808061.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6239355 I really really really like this philosophical discourse!

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 00:27:06 2015 No.6239372 >>6239355 >babby's first exposure to Marxism Tell me more about these fresh new opinions of yours.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 00:27:46 2015 No.6239373 File: 20 KB, 225x225, yaranaika.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6239347 This is astounding. It's like a Nietzschean parody of the herd! EXCELLENT CONTINUE

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 00:29:10 2015 No.6239378 I'll tell you what DOESN'T belong in this thread and that's, time cube http://www.timecube.com/

Anonymous Sun Mar 8 00:30:57 2015 No.6239381

>>6239355

Hivemind? Oh, you mean like the herd! How considerate of you to judge us for being part of the herd! I'm now more firmly persuaded than ever that Nietzsche was right about us, and we must be forced by some greater authority (please tell us it'll be YOU! OH PLEASE OH PLEASE!) todo what's right for society as dictated by Those Who Know!

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 00:33:33 2015 No.6239390 >>6239378 You're wrong. IT TOTALLY BELONGS IN THIS THREAD! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tn2UCqL5qyo

Anonymous Sun Mar 8 00:35:28 2015 No.6239400

Shut the FUCK Up, you fucking retards.

I am not some fucking pretentious college liberal who doesn't give a fuck about anything but seeming intelligent.

I am a HUMAN BEING who wants to end all of the pain and suffering in the world, and I can't do that when fucking sociopathic egoists like NIETZSCHE are being taken seriously and admired. That is pure, unfiltered capitalist propaganda to make you support power structures, oppression, and a new corporate aristocracy. You are being oppressed and justifying your oppressors because they're "oh-so-much stronger" than you are or out of a misplaced sense that YOU will someday become an oppressor yourself and get to kill all the Jews or whatever.

Anonymous Sun Mar 8 00:35:42 2015 No.6239402

>>6239355
>Contrary to what you may believe, it IS possible to reject our vapid consumerist culture that has led to the direct death of millions and to instead embrace positivity, altruism, charity, freedom, cooperation, and peacefulness.

I guess if it has to come at the expense of healthy competition I don't want it enough to really take the dive? IDK. I like the values you're expressing here, just not enough to totally give up the other side of life. To me there is nothing inherently unhealthy about competition. I like it, I find it fun. I can't even begin to convey to you how much dread the idea of a world without it fills me with. I don't mean necessarily capitalistic competition, the competitive instinct could be sublimated in videogames or something. But the core idea of self development through competition matters to a lot of people. A world without it, even if justice reigns, kind of seems not worth living in. Suppose all the questions of justice are settled someday. Suppose we achieve perfect social justice over the entire world. What are people supposed to do? People would artificially recreate competition in the form of sports, games, artistic creation, etc, because ultimately life pursues a self development and the human soul is not content with justice alone.

Anonymous Sun Mar 8 00:36:30 2015 No.6239405

>>6239335

Fascism is just the logical outcome of Democracy you silly pleb. Nietzsche's critiques of Democracy and Egalitarianism carry on to Fascism. Fascists are always brutal petite-bourgois and plebean mobs who have their prejudices personified in a dictator who can "express their will" ( aka give them shit and suppress everyone who isn't average, whether it be the leftist degenerate on the low end or the aristocrat on the high end). Nietzsche was explicitly against the horizontal pressure of the masses that we find in Democracy and Fascism. He wanted people like himself to have enough authority that they could live apart from the dictates of the masses, foster their own creativity and personal virtue, and through their generosity help out their lessers as much as possible.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 00:36:47 2015 No.6239406 >>6239400 the capital words are a bit too much

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 00:38:03 2015 No.6239409 >>6239400 > uhma human being you anti-semites! Ok you had me until this point, gg, nice troll anon.

Anonymous Sun Mar 8 00:39:28 2015 No.6239416

>>6239381
That's another thing about anti-Nietzscheans. They are subconsciously Nietzschean themselves half the time anyway. These fuckers go on and on about how there's no such thing as a higher class of human and yet they cloister away in these upper middle class communities centered around universities, and go on and on about how evil the world outside their cloistered bullshit communes is evil and they have the right to legislate all of its tendencies away. What a bunch of deluded, blinkered, stupid HYPOCRITES! :D

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 00:44:34 2015 No.6239427 >>6239400 Nietzsche isn't propaganda. His entire legacy is has been built on word of mouth distribution through sympathetic readers. He never had schools forcing people to read his shit or the media fawning over him.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 00:47:49 2015 No.6239431 >>6239400 GASP YOU...YOU SWORE AT US?! ?!?!?@?#@!?@$@$?$ BUT BUT BUT RITE UP HERE--> >>6239273 YOU SAID YOU WERE ALWAYS CORTEOUS AND POLITE BUT I GUESS NIETZSCHEANS ARE JUST SUBHUMANS TO YOU (ur adorbs)

Anonymous Sun Mar 8 00:54:16 2015 No.6239441

>>6239431
Honestly Nietzsche himself described our friend here pretty well. There's this passage in one of his books where he talks about people being moralists while actually being machiavellian in deep down, but having to delude themselves about it. He then adds how the desire to save others is usually a disguised desire to rule over them--that's what's going on when our friend says "I'm a human being who wants to cure suffering." He's actually himself fascist on the deepest levels.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 01:15:18 2015 No.6239481 >>6239400 So, like, what? Do you think you at all accomplished anything like a refutation of Nietzsche in this thread? Pathetic.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 01:58:35 2015 No.6239586 >>6238654 >im an idiot btw :^)

Anonymous Sun Mar 8 09:27:20 2015 No.6240302

>>6239196
I'm not a reactionary at all. Nor am I a conservative. But you are a Marxist. And that is embarrassing.

Marxism is the single most coercive authoritarian slavery man has yet to conceive of. It led directly to the deaths of 100 million people and the absolute destruction of generations of lives.

Marx was a fat, nasty, drunken, self-hating Jew. And he was a poor economist. Most people go through their Marxist phase when they are like 17. Are you a teenager? (I hope)

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 09:39:45 2015 No.6240361 >>6239405 You're so childish, ...it's kind of awesome. I mean of you're going to do something you may as well do it all the way.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 10:02:12 2015 No.6240447 >>6238654 >implying philosophy is a real major nice b8 m8 :^)

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 10:03:21 2015 No.6240455 >>6238540 ho shit, even an intro debate course would tell you it's on you. not sure if this is shit posting, but you've got me hooked.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 10:46:15 2015 No.6240620 >>6238663 Every single (important) moral system/religion of the ancients. Are you trolling or just genuinely stupid?

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 10:48:40 2015 No.6240629 File: 24 KB, 331x334, Stirner Pepe.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6238492 best smug philosopher

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 11:30:44 2015 No.6240771 >>6238793 >calling Derrida left wing >mfw you dont know what u talking about

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 11:35:33 2015 No.6240788 >>6238540 That only works if you're asking someone to explain their position without countering their claim. This time you're the one making the claim, that means you need to explain your position.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 11:36:15 2015 No.6240794 File: 74 KB, 947x540, 1385676260230.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >egoism

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 11:37:05 2015 No.6240799 >>6240794 shut up

Anonymous Sun Mar 8 11:58:09 2015 No.6240906

>>6239335
>His work is filled with hatred, disdain, and contempt for virtually all member of the human race
This can be easily disproven by picking up any random book of his and flipping to any random page. 99% of the time he will be saying something that totally negates this.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 12:10:46 2015 No.6240977 >>6238985 >Violence and oppression are not "cool" >proceeds to advocate for violence against the group he opposes Anon, you are the violent and oppressive one.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 12:15:17 2015 No.6241011 Any dogmatic thought system

Anonymous Sun Mar 8 16:10:02 2015 No.6242133

>>6239114

Fascism is based around populism and a leader who personifies the "will of the people", it's just democracy for people with testosterone at the end of the day. Nietzsche was anti collectivist and therefore anti-democratic and anti-nationalistic, he thought that the idea of group wills, excessive communitarianism and state bureacracy were all poison for aristocratic types. Guys like Mussolini and Hitler were just products of the mob, "normal men" who personified your average joe and his prejudices. While fascism is elitist in terms of national relations, it is incredibly egalitarian in it's sociology. You have leaders who personify the people and gain their legitimacy only from their backing, and a homogenized classless society of equal citizens who are treated as being literally one with the state. Fascism stays true to the "the will of the people" by eliminating anyone who doesn't fit in with the majority. Fascism is just democracy stripped of it's synthetic union with liberalism, and Nietzsche wanted none of that nonsense.

Nietzsche was for individuals who stood above and against the masses for the sake of their own personal values. He wanted personal relations between people instead of bureaucratic state control, and he wanted the unique individual to have the power and freedom to flourish.

>>6239157
>Glorify violent conflict and military leaders

Why did he hate Bismarck then ?

>Reject democracy, equality, and basically anything that has to do with freedom while still (nonsensically) praising personal freedom

Equality is always anti freedom because you have to synthetically level people out in order to achieve it in actuality. Democracy is the rule of the mob over the individual. Nietzsche loved freedom, you're just retarded and have bought into some bad ideology.

>Dismiss all altruism and generosity as the morality of a slave
His claim was that only aristocratic types could be altruistic and generous in an honest way that wasn't based on bad moral posturing.

>>6239308
Sounds like you want to impose your will to power on others, how dare someone not hold the same arbitrary moral values that you right ?

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 16:14:33 2015 No.6242160 >>6239308 >>6239335 Please, read Nietzsche or maybe something easier like Stirner before making a retard out of your opinions

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 16:17:27 2015 No.6242169 When the fuck did we get so many people on this board who have a boner for Nietzsche? Is /pol/ just spilling over or something?

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 16:20:11 2015 No.6242176 File: 19 KB, 391x234, 1425488460375.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6242169

Anonymous Sun Mar 8 16:23:45 2015 No.6242195

>>6242133

Individualism is an ideology for terrible people who are incapable of extending their self-awareness on to others.

Collectivism is not formed out of a sense of entitlement. It is formed out of a sense of empathy, which is apparently a concept too difficult for individualists to comprehend, because they are edgy teens who think they are strong enough to survive without the aid of other people (Protip: You aren't).

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 16:27:49 2015 No.6242213 >>6242169 >implying /pol/lacks understand Nietzsche >implying he didn't write countless lines on how much he hated people like that I mean, it definitely is bigger than the Stirner fad, but still, don't get paranoid.

Anonymous Sun Mar 8 16:29:39 2015 No.6242218

>>6242195

Why can't one maintain their individuality and also be empathetic to other individuals? We have millions of examples throughout history. It's far more dehumanizing to just be another replaceable member of a mob than to be an individual who has real relationships with other individuals. Why do you want to reduce human beings to cattle ? Do you really think so little of people that you think that one cannot through their own self interest want to care for others and work with them ?

Anonymous Sun Mar 8 16:31:36 2015 No.6242229

>>6242218

Why are you so absurdly paranoid that other people are out to get you?

Leftism has ALWAYS been about freedom and liberation. Collectivists don't want you to be a "slave" to the mob. They don't want ANY power structure or hierarchy, and individualism inherently creates both of those things, because it leads to people forcing their will on others for the sake of their own self-aggrandizement.

Anonymous Sun Mar 8 16:33:22 2015 No.6242244

>>6242195
>Individualism is an ideology for terrible people who are incapable of extending their self-awareness on to others.

What if it's actually *better* for other people to suffer? What if you're doing other people a disservice by providing them countless crutches and dull their abilities to develop various life skills?

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 16:34:46 2015 No.6242250 >>6242244 >Social Darwinism Shut the fuck up. It's a stupid non-argument to justify oppression and authoritarianism.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 16:37:06 2015 No.6242261 >>6242229 Dude, have you just never given thought to the conflict between liberty and equality? Neither one necessitates the other. And that's part of the problem with equality as goal. It's at the expense of liberty.

Anonymous Sun Mar 8 16:39:33 2015 No.6242276

>>6242250

Actually, you know what, this is why I hate Nietzscheans so fucking much.

They are ALL Social Darwinists who want to excuse all of the slavery and power in the world because they maintain some sort of misanthropic delusion that they're inherently better than other people and that THEY have a chance of becoming the Ubermensch.

I, by contrast, actually like people. I don't want to see other people have their freedom or comfort taken over out of some insane delusion that my oppressors know better than me and that I should just let them "do their thing".

Fuck you. Without morality and compassion, mankind would just be an animalistic race of complete egoistic savages incapable of relating to or understanding each other. Oh, yes, that really is a race of SUPERMEN, how could I have EVER wanted the working class to rise up against such impressive masters?

You are literally everything that is wrong with this world.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 16:40:03 2015 No.6242278 >>6242250 Ah, so the troll's back. Really, I think you should reconsider the lack of meme jokes in your post. Give em that extra little wink and nudge.

Anonymous Sun Mar 8 16:40:08 2015 No.6242279

>>6242250
First of all, look at how disdainful the tone of your posts is. It makes you come off like an ideological tool who only knows how to respond with rage because he conflates his beliefs with his identity.

Secondly, I asked perfectly valid questions which you ignored by trying to dismiss them as "social darwinism" when it's not clear that the implications of my questions can be categorized that way since that implies a telos which is absent from my post.

Anonymous Sun Mar 8 16:42:08 2015 No.6242289

>>6242261

It isn't a real dichotomy.

The rulers of the world want you to THINK it's a real dichotomy so that they can maintain their power.

Freedom and equality can coexist and SHOULD coexist. I refuse to let some stupid Rand-tier Social Darwinists try to tell me otherwise.

Anonymous Sun Mar 8 16:42:58 2015 No.6242292

>>6242276
>Without morality and compassion, mankind would just be an animalistic race of complete egoistic savages incapable of relating to or understanding each other.

Grouping "compassion" with "morality" doesn't make your assertion any less crypto-fascist.

>Without "insert ideological savior here* we'd just be savages! All hail *insert ideology*!

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 16:43:34 2015 No.6242299 >>6238544 When conservatives realize it too.

Anonymous Sun Mar 8 16:44:31 2015 No.6242307

>>6242279

I have a hatred for any and all ideologies that hurt people or suppress people.

Nietzsche's ideas are incompatible with equality, freedom, or cooperation. As a result, I despise him and all of the psychopathic brutes who think that such an ideology is reasonable or ideal.

I don't enjoy seeing other people in pain, unlike you sadistic excuses for human beings.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 16:45:56 2015 No.6242312 >>6242276 Yes, you like people so much that you call them"an animalistic race of complete egoistic savages incapable of relating to or understanding each other" when they don't abide by your morality. What a dogmatic idiot.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 16:46:29 2015 No.6242315 >>6242292 Anyone who has compassion will come to the conclusion that some acts are wrong. If you have compassion, then the idea of murder seems disgusting and repulsive. If murder disgusts and repulses you, then it naturally follows that it's wrong.

Anonymous Sun Mar 8 16:47:10 2015 No.6242319

>>6242307

actually nietzsche wrote quite a bit about pain, (which i have no doubt you didn't read) where he points out that the strongest are also the most merciful because outlaws are no threat to them, it's the weak who must be the most conservative because anything and everything threatens them.

Anonymous Sun Mar 8 16:47:25 2015 No.6242320

>>6242289

You've never read any political philosophy that's not Marx, have you?

Even Marx doesn't suggest they go together without some fundamental change in the conception of at least one of the concepts.

You're not a well-informed representative of Marxism, and you're actively hurting your own cause among others, which is probably why a bunch of posters think you're a troll.

Anonymous Sun Mar 8 16:48:23 2015 No.6242323

>>6242312

If you don't have morality, then there is no incentive to help other people or to do the right thing, because you don't believe there is a right thing to do.

Are you people really this fucking retarded that you can't understand why a lack of morality inherently leads to sociopathic behavior? If morals don't exist, then why is killing somebody wrong? If it isn't wrong, then why should society try to prevent it?

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 16:48:29 2015 No.6242325 >>6242315 That's just your perception, there is no intrinsic quality to that action that makes it wrong, given the right circumstances it could be justified.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 16:49:56 2015 No.6242329 >>6242323 Amorality is NOT immorality; a lack of morality does not necessitate being immoral. This is some fucking 101 shit.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 16:50:27 2015 No.6242330 >>6242323 You don't need morality to not be a sociopath, you just need to decide "I don't want to be fucked with, so I won't fuck with others." Your self-preservation instincts deter you from doing things that put you in harms way.

Anonymous Sun Mar 8 16:50:52 2015 No.6242332

>>6242319
>>6242320

I'm sorry that not defending oppressive regimes makes me a troll.

Again, I like people. I want people to be happy and free. Therefore, I oppose Nietzsche's philosophy, because he advocated for an authoritarian and social Darwinist ideology that promotes rulers, slaves, and a complete breakdown of any compassionate or empathetic characteristics that mankind has to offer.

Anonymous Sun Mar 8 16:50:57 2015 No.6242333

>>6242323
nietzsche never argued against "morality" he just pointed out that the strong and successful have a different moral system than the failed and sick, and he thought it was healthier for humans to stay with the morality that values strength, vitality and success over failure, weakness and death.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 16:52:07 2015 No.6242342 >>6242315 Oh! So really you're not even a Marxist, with respect to moral conceptions (he wouldn't agree with a single thing you've said!). You're just a dirty Rousseauian. The French Revolution didn't corrupt itself on those same grounds, did it?

Anonymous Sun Mar 8 16:53:16 2015 No.6242347

>>6242329

Immorality doesn't exist if you are amoral. There is no deterrent to doing bad things if you don't believe that anything is bad.

>>6242330

Okay, so you are a third party and you see another man violently attempting to murder somebody.

Do you step in? If so, why? What he's doing isn't immoral, so what reason do you have to try to stop him? He's merely exercising his natural "strength" over another person, just like Nietzsche says he has every right to do.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 16:53:39 2015 No.6242349 >>6242333 This. All value systems are forms of morality for Nietzsche. Maybe actually fucking READ him instead of debating a Wikipedia strawman version of him?

Anonymous Sun Mar 8 16:55:27 2015 No.6242357

>>6242333

Only unbelievably vile people believe that compassion, empathy, and equality stem from "weakness".

You are a fucking horrible person if you see oppression and sympathize with the oppressor over the oppressed.

>>6242342

I don't agree with everything Marx said.

I agree with his socioeconomic analysis of mankind's history.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 16:55:29 2015 No.6242358 >>6242332 Guys, he's still just trolling. Again, as pointed out above, note how he never quotes sources or refers to specific well defined doctrines or these of either Marx or Nietzsche. Just show him your dicks until he goes away.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 16:56:09 2015 No.6242360 >>6242347 This is amusing, please go on ;^)

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 16:57:16 2015 No.6242366 >>6242357 Ah, good, so you're just bullshitting your philosophical position without reference to even Marx's criticisms of your position. How old are you, sonny boy? What year of middle school are you in?

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 16:58:25 2015 No.6242374 >>6242360 Right? I fucking love this shit.

Anonymous Sun Mar 8 16:59:03 2015 No.6242377

>>6242358
>>6242360

I am not trolling. I am angry. I am angry because we have advanced as a society that barbaric ideologies such as "STRONG SHOULD STOMP ON WEAK, LOL ME STRONG, ME SUPERIOR BECAUSE GENETICS, LOL" should not have any appeal to them.

Instead, I see people who have a hatred for anyone who they deem to be "weaker" than them and wish to exploit, oppress, mistreat, and abuse these people out of some ridiculous notion of natural superiority. It is disgusting, cruel, and absolutely savage.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:00:16 2015 No.6242383 >>6242366 >accusing ME of being immature for disagreeing with anti-democracy and pro-violence edgelords Keep telling yourself how superior and advanced your genetics are, you disgusting disgrace of a human.

Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:00:52 2015 No.6242386

>>6238465
OP was clearly bullied in high school and that's why he's such a beta when it comes to "sapwession :((("

All moralists are the same. Whenever you meet a hardcore moralist, you know someone wronged them and now they want to impose their strict 'no-no' rules on the party that is mankind and nature.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:01:52 2015 No.6242390 >>6242377 We are talking about spiritual strength, shitbird. There's no talk of genetics here

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:01:59 2015 No.6242392 >>6242347 >so what reason do you have to try to stop him? to exercise your own strength over him

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:01:59 2015 No.6242393 >>6242357 Ok, what if I want to investigate your position for myself out of my own budding interest? What do you recommend I read?

Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:02:01 2015 No.6242395

>>6242357
>>6242357
>You are a fucking horrible person if you see oppression and sympathize with the oppressor over the oppressed.

who decides who the oppressor is? ask a tea party patriot they will tell you obama is the oppressor (and isis would agree), or ask a cuban in miami and he will say castro is the oppressor, ask a beta virgin and he will say the feminist-chad alliance are the oppressors...you see, this is how nietzsche killed modernism (although it kept going forward like a zombie until world war two laid it to rest permanently)

Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:02:43 2015 No.6242401

>>6242386

I wasn't bullied, but I like your obvious implication that bully victims deserve it.

This is the mentality of all Nietzsche supporters. They are basically bullies at heart; they want to hurt people who are weaker than them because they feel they have a right to.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:03:23 2015 No.6242404 >>6242386 yup, op has that stench of resentment all over him that can only come from being a teenage beta

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:04:16 2015 No.6242407 >>6242383 Funny people like you are an excellent argument against democracy. People just aren't educated enough to be able to decide what's best for them. It's really quite heartbreaking.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:04:24 2015 No.6242408 >>6242401 communists bully hardworking business men who are responsible for economy growth, you are a monster

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:04:25 2015 No.6242409 >>6242395 wow your post didn't say anything

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:05:14 2015 No.6242414 >>6242401 So, do ya think all your work in trying to take on Nietzsche on 4chan will be effective in getting you all that hot tumblr sjw puss you're totes after?

Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:05:20 2015 No.6242417

>>6242390

>spiritual

That's some nice logic and reason you've got there.

>>6242392

What incentive do I have to use my strength to stop him from using his strength?

>>6242393

I haven't read any anti-Nietzsche philosophers, so I don't know. These are all my own thoughts after reading him.

>>6242395

The oppressor is whoever uses their power to hurt others and keep them in shackles.

ALL world leaders are oppressors by nature.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:05:22 2015 No.6242418 >>6242401 > they want to hurt people who are weaker than them because they feel they have a right to. But anon, we have the right to do it because you can't stop us :^)

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:05:28 2015 No.6242419 >>6242409 no answer, huh? didn't think so, and that's why grand narratives like marxism are fucking dead.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:06:06 2015 No.6242422 >>6242409 Relativism, one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. Whose to say you're right?

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:06:30 2015 No.6242424 >>6242417 >The oppressor is whoever uses their power to hurt others and keep them in shackles. >ALL world leaders are oppressors by nature. edgy post, tiplord

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:07:36 2015 No.6242430 >>6242414 Clearly it's having some effect, and as we all know /lit/ is the premier place where prominent philosophers debate each other.

Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:07:56 2015 No.6242433

>>6242404

Wow, this sure is some mercy and compassion you are displaying. I am utterly convinced that aristocrats and "STOOPERMEN" will use their power for good instead of bullying.

>>6242407

>trying to take away the voice of someone you disagree with

Wow, gee, that sure is some personal freedom you're advocating right there.

>>6242414

SJWs are annoying cunts who are too caught up in identity politics to see the real issues at the root of our society.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:09:12 2015 No.6242441 >>6242419 >didn't think so answer to what? yes people see other people as oppressors. what is your point? that still doesn't mean "side with the oppressor" which was the point you were responding to.

Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:09:18 2015 No.6242442

>>6242229

>Why are you so absurdly paranoid that other people are out to get you?

I'm not the one who thinks that people can't be decent unless they are leveled out and subordinated to a mob. I think that my neighbor and I can work together charitably without social and legal pressure forcing us.

Look at The French Revolution, The Soviet Union , Modern Democracy, and Fascism ( all left wing). Leftism has always been about a large mass of people imposing their will on the minority under the guise of "freedom for the people" ,it is not freedom for the concrete individual, it is the dictates of the dehumanized masses which takes the center stage and is personified in mediocre men who carry their prejudices. The leftist mob always takes up some ideological moniker like " citizen" " proletariat" or "human", depending on how extensive they want their power to grow- they want you to be one of many and subordinate your identity to their ideology. They want a power structure of shared authority for the whole mob can impose on those who have more wealth, more talent, make common sensibilities uncomfortable, and have different moral standards then the average joe, they hate that there is a diversity of stations and values in life because it leads to conflict and inequality due to their differences. They want all humans to be homogeneous and undistinguished by race,sex, class, vocation, religion, character, strength, intelligence ect. It is always their hatred and resentment against the exceptional few that fuels their identity, whether they be reacting against the Church, the Monarchy, the Aristocracy or Bourgeois, they are always based on weakness of the individual who immolates himself to join a collective strong enough to hurt those they resent and force them to submit. It is always their raw quantity that grants them legitimacy, never the actual virtue of their ideas. Worst of all, Tyrants arise when they can excuse their brutality on the fact that they are only following the peoples will, there is no limit to what "the people" can impose on themselves.

Your whole ideology is just a smokescreen for the reign of quantity and tyranny and you think it's all about "freedom" and "compassion" - have fun getting lynched when you disagree with popular opinion in your "free" collectivist society.

Power structures and hierarchies always exist because mutually exclusive ideas cannot both be realized in the same space and you need a form of legitimacy that can decide on what path to take. Eventually authority can no longer be differed and the discussion must end, especially in life and death situations. You can either chose accountable individuals who base the decision on their own conscience and intelligence, or a howling mob full of individually unaccountable people who can always differ blame when things go wrong. How can you think that a few potential tyrants is worse than an anonymous collective of millions of them ?

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:09:20 2015 No.6242443 >>6242424 >anti-bullying and pro-freedom are edgy Your minimal grasp of the English language truly is astonishing.

Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:09:46 2015 No.6242446

>>6242401

Poindexter detected

You ever wonder if the reason you're so angry is because your narrow morality is filling you with disgust for the world? Maybe it's not just we who think this way, but history, nature, the earth, everything in the universe except you and your flock of nuns?

Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:09:55 2015 No.6242447

>>6242433
>SJWs are annoying cunts who are too caught up in identity politics to see the real issues at the root of our society.

yes, clearly the REAL issue at the root of our society is that dudes who work a mcdonalds can't afford cadillacs, that is an injustice and only world revolution can remedy it! to the barracades comrade! free cadis for all!!!1

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:10:16 2015 No.6242451 >>6242422 >Relativism, one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. doesn't matter. you just don't side with the oppressor

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:11:02 2015 No.6242456 >>6242441 so you have no real values other than side with whoever is weakest and angriest? this is exactly the kind of stupidity nietzsche is warning against...

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:11:19 2015 No.6242459 >>6242433 >the real issues at the root of our society. most of which stem from identity and representation

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:11:25 2015 No.6242461 >>6242433 I'm a Marxist, I'm merely lamenting your poor education, the public schools must have really failed you.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:11:42 2015 No.6242464 >>6242417 Which of his books have you read?

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:12:34 2015 No.6242466 >>6242446 >history, nature, the earth, lol'd rhetorician spotted

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:13:16 2015 No.6242469 >>6242451 >doesn't matter. you just don't side with the oppressor why not?

Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:13:27 2015 No.6242470

So, let me get this fucking straight.

You want me to buy into your ideology, and so you do this by trying to argue

>some people are genetically superior to others and this gives them the right to rule
>the strong have the right to do whatever they want to hose weaker than them
>morality doesn't exist and compassion is weakness
>bulled are justified in hurting their victims
>democracy is flawed and society should instead be run by an aristocracy

No fucking thank you. See, I actually am a good person and don't subscribe to Fascist insanity.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:13:50 2015 No.6242471 why did i open this thread

Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:15:12 2015 No.6242484

>>6242456
>so you

i'm not the guy you were initially arguing with. i'm just saying that the way you tried to counter his point didn't take into account what he was saying really. and if i'm arguing a certain way it doesn't mean that i actively follow it; just that i can see it through logically

>whoever is weakest and angriest?

is this your definition of 'oppressed'?

Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:15:55 2015 No.6242486

>>6242417

Re: what to read to understand your position; I was less referring to the anti-Nietzsche position, more so the position one would have to hold to find Nietzsche questionable. Like, are there any philosophical, historical, or economic books you might recommend?

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:16:28 2015 No.6242490 >>6242469 because there's no reason for it to matter. it's beside the point

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:17:45 2015 No.6242492 >>6242490 cool, so your "morality" has no basis in anything other than you think it sounds cool

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:17:54 2015 No.6242494 >>6242490 If you don't get in any oppressor side.. ..you are gonna get oppressed by everyone m8

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:18:13 2015 No.6242497 >>6242486 I'm an anarchist. I would recommend Chomsky if you're looking for sound, rational, practical, and well-stated arguments for equality and liberty.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:18:45 2015 No.6242500 >>6242484 >is this your definition of 'oppressed'? ok, so what's YOUR definition of oppressed?

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:18:59 2015 No.6242503 >>6242470 Did a dude with a thick mustache bully you when you were 12 ?

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:20:00 2015 No.6242510 >>6242497 Are you a positive freedom or a negative freedom kind of guy?

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:20:37 2015 No.6242515 >>6242497 top lel I bet you will start reading furiously against what you despise only to start agreeing with it in like 10 months

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:20:45 2015 No.6242519 >>6242503 You guys are doing a great job of convincing me that Nietzsche fans have compassion and empathy. >HURR DURR KIDS WHO GET BULLIED ARE TOTAL FAGS, LOL I BULLIED A KID WHEN I WAS LITTLE, I'M SUCH A FUCKING UBERMENSCH, POWER TO THE STRONG

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:20:50 2015 No.6242520 >>6238465 >Any strain of theism Fucking dropped. And you were doing so good too.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:21:35 2015 No.6242526 >>6242470 Some people are genetically inferior to others, have you ever met someone with downs? A truly merciful society would put those poor wretches down.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:22:52 2015 No.6242531 >>6242492 >your "morality not mine >other than you think it sounds cool no idea how you came to that conclusion. i don't think you can read very well >>6242494 ok

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:23:53 2015 No.6242537 >>6242500 how does this matter?

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:24:04 2015 No.6242538 >>6242526 in most states you can abort a downs foetus, but some republican fanatics are trying to force women to have a retard baby out of cruelty

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:24:23 2015 No.6242540 File: 676 KB, 680x1152, 0a1.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] ITT: A spooked illiterate fag baits every intellectual Nietzsche fan

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:25:08 2015 No.6242544 >>6242510 Positive freedom. Negative freedom inherently leads to a non-libertarian society, because it results in some people forcing their will on others, therefore defeating it's supposed opposition to outside interference.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:25:09 2015 No.6242545 >>6242537 it doesn't, that's the point, it's better to side with strong and successful people than the weak and failed. or explain to me why not?

Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:26:07 2015 No.6242552
File: 38 KB, 660x440, FrozenLetItGo.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>6242470
Let it go, let it go!

Let it go, LET IT GO!

Can't hold on to that ressentiment

Let it go, let it go!
Let it go! LET IT GOOOOO!!!

Turn away from nay-saying
You should-n't change / na-ture's ways
Let the storm rage on!
You never believed this shit anyway.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:26:11 2015 No.6242554 >>6242537 it doesn't, so why the fuck did you bring it up you god damn retard?

Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:26:13 2015 No.6242555

>>6242519
Hey we're not all into Nietzsche, I respect his work, but it's not my cup of tea.

I'm just here to enjoy the ride.

And to be fair, it's not just the Nietzsche-guys who think you're a fag, I myself am a Marxist, and I also hope you have been/will be bullied at some point in your life.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:26:45 2015 No.6242559 >>6242554 >so why the fuck did you bring it up you asked, not me

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:27:29 2015 No.6242562 >>6242433 >anon accuses troll of trolling for tumblr pussy >troll responds: >SJWs are annoying cunts who are too caught up in identity politics to see the real issues at the root of our society. You can't make this shit up. This is fucking hilarious.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:28:18 2015 No.6242569 >>6242545 how is it better?

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:28:48 2015 No.6242573 >>6242559 i said: >>whoever is weakest and angriest? you said: >is this your definition of 'oppressed'? i said: >ok, so what's YOUR definition of oppressed? you said: >how does this matter?

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:29:13 2015 No.6242575 Why does opposing Nietzsche make me a troll? Is it really impossible for you to consider that some people might genuinely be opposed to the idea that the "strong" can and should stomp on the "weak"?

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:30:31 2015 No.6242587 >>6242544 How strange, Positive freedom is closely related to Fascism and Racism. So you believe you have the freedom to do whatever you want to anyone/anything with absolutely no restrictions?

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:30:33 2015 No.6242588 >>6242569 the strong and successful are people with the will strong enough to do what they want, the weak are not, if you glorify being weak nothing will happen....the weak have never done anything good in history.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:30:47 2015 No.6242590 >>6242575 Not listing what books you've read of Nietzsche, since you didn't read him, and then making stuff up about him after people have refuted you multiple times, makes you a troll.

Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:30:54 2015 No.6242591

>>6242545
>it doesn't, that's the point,

yes, my point that the definition of what the oppressor is doesn't matter, only that you don't side with them if you do manage to define who the oppressor is. the person i was responding to thought it did matter.

> it's better to side with strong and successful people than the weak and failed.

no idea where this is coming from

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:31:32 2015 No.6242595 >>6242519 Have you ever considered taking martial arts lessons ? You might be able defend yourself against those boys who stole your hat at the playground next time they try it if you do. Just a suggestion.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:31:39 2015 No.6242596 >>6242575 did you ever consider being weak is fucking lame and you shouldn't do it?

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:31:48 2015 No.6242598 Hey, Chomskyite, respond to this already: >>6242464

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:32:21 2015 No.6242605 >>6242573 It doesn't matter because it's relative, and most likely not black and white like you seem to think everything is.

Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:32:53 2015 No.6242610

>>6242573
>i said:
>>ok, so what's YOUR definition of oppressed?

then i said my definition of oppressed didn't matter. then you asked why i brought it (my definition of oppressed) up, and i told you i didn't bring it up since you asked what my definition of oppressed was and not me.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:33:41 2015 No.6242614 >>6242497 Wait, Chomsky? REALLY? B-b-b-but he's a shit-tier political thinker!

Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:34:26 2015 No.6242621

>>6242605
>It doesn't matter because it's relative

holy shit you finally got it you fucking slow ass mongoloid, the masters glorify strength while the slaves glorify weakness, so if you side with "the oppressed" you are mentally making yourself a slave, get it

Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:34:41 2015 No.6242624

>>6242588
>if you glorify being weak

that's not what siding with the weak is about. it's about returning strength to the weak, which is a greater show of strength than just siding with people who inherited something the strong gave them. siding with the strong is a show of weakness, unless you are strong and successful yourself

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:36:24 2015 No.6242632 >>6242540 It's threads like these I live for. swoons

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:36:55 2015 No.6242636 >>6242624 >return strength to the weak if they deserved strength they wouldn't have lost it to begin with...this is the sickness of ressentiment, you think there is something wrong with the world which must be "fixed"

>>	« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !mxvabIoSIE Sun Mar 8 17:37:51 2015 No.6242643 >>6242614 You are mistaken.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:38:27 2015 No.6242645 >>6242590 THIS. FUCKING TELL US WHAT NIETZSCHE YOU'VE READ ALREADY FOR FUCKS SAKE

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:40:40 2015 No.6242659 >>6242636 >if they deserved strength the strong are just strong. they don't need historical precedence to check if it's ok whether they be strong or not

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:41:13 2015 No.6242665 >>6242659 no shit fucktard that's what i said

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:42:17 2015 No.6242674 I'm 90% that shit head left and we're now arguing with ourselves

Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:42:41 2015 No.6242677

>>6242643

Like shit I am! I've read the major political thinkers extensively (Plato, Aristotle, Xenophon, Thucydides, Tacitus, Plutarch, Augustine, Aquinas, Dante, Machiavelli, Hobbes, Locke, Spinoza, Rousseau, Adam Smith, Hume, Marx, Kant, Hegel, Nietzsche), and Chomsky, who *I have in fact read* rates with fucking Rawls and Nozick as a modernist retard with no capacity for understanding the subtle compromises and fundamental problems of politics.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:43:27 2015 No.6242684 >>6242624 >return strength to the weak that's like saying you're going to return all the hot babes to the betas, doesn't even make sense

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:43:58 2015 No.6242688 >>6242674 C'est la vie.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:44:26 2015 No.6242692 >>6242665 so you can be strong and fight for the weak

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:46:35 2015 No.6242705 >>6242677 Chomsky is a "magisterium jumper" who had a few good insights during the early days of linguistics, and since then has been pretending to be an authority on political economy, an area that is is not his field

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:47:34 2015 No.6242714 >>6242705 I'll definitely agree with that.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:48:15 2015 No.6242723 >>6242692 yeah, and that's the phenomena of leftwing dictators, they are strongmen (literally) who "defend the oppressed" (usually by taking all their surplus product and sending it to a swiss bank account)

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 17:52:07 2015 No.6242755 >>6242723 Left wing ideologies are rarely pro-dictator, they're just men who co-opt revolutions for there own power

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 19:28:07 2015 No.6243342 >>6242596 There's a difference between advocating for weakness and not having immense contempt for people weaker than yourself. Of course, you're an edgy faggot who actually likes Nietzsche, so you probably can't comprehend that difference.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 19:29:25 2015 No.6243348 >>6242645 I read Thus Spoke Zarathustra. It made me want to vomit.

Anonymous Sun Mar 8 19:45:50 2015 No.6243455

>>6243348

Oh, so you read his COMPLETELY SYMBOLIC BOOK and think that you understand his position well enough?

Here, let's see what Nietzsche himself says about Thus Spoke Zarathustra WITH RESPECT TO HIS WORK AFTER THAT BOOK:

BEYOND GOOD AND EVIL
Prelude to a Philosophy of the Future

1
The task for the immediately following years was marked out as clearly as possible. After the yea-saying part of my task was resolved,
it now came time for the nay saying, nay-doing half: the revaluation of all hitherto existing values themselves, the great war — the evocation of a Judgment Day. Included here is the slow search for kindred spirits, for those who out of strength, could lend a hand in the task of destruction. — From then on all of my writings become fishing hooks: perhaps I understand as well as anyone how to fish?...If nothing got caught, it is not my fault. There were no fish...

2
This book (1886) is in all essentials a critique of modernity, modern science, modern art, even modern politics, along with indications of
an opposite type that is anything but modern, a noble, yea-saying type. In the latter sense the book is a school for gentlemen, the concept taken more spiritually and more radically than it has ever been taken
before. Even to endure it one must have heart, one must never have learned fear...All the things of which our era is proud are felt to be
contrary to this type, as bad manners almost, our famous “objectivity” for instance, our “sympathy with all that suffers,” our “historical sense” with its submissiveness before foreign tastes, with its lying on
its belly before petit faits, its “scientificality.” — If one considers that it comes after Zarathustra, then one can also perhaps divine the dietetic régime to which it owes its origin. The eye, spoiled by a tremendous compulsion to see far — Zarathustra is even more far-seeing than the czar — , is here forced to sharply grasp what is nearest, the time at
hand, what is around us. In all the bits and pieces, and above all in the form, one will find the same voluntary instincts which made a
Zarathustra possible. The refinement in form, in design, in the art of keeping silent is in the foreground; psychology is handled with an
admitted hardness and cruelty — the book dispenses with every good-natured word...All this is refreshing: — Who could ultimately
guess what kind of refreshment is necessitated by such an expenditure of goodness as is found in Zarathustra?...Theologically speaking —
listen, for I rarely speak as a theologian — it was God himself who at the end of his day’s work lay down as a serpent under the tree of
knowledge: thus he rested from being God...He had made everything too beautiful...The devil is merely God’s idleness on that seventh day...

SO! TELL US GREAT PHILOSOPHER; Zarathustra has a *different* task to it than the later books. What are these tasks, and how do they fit together, o great shitlord?

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 19:47:26 2015 No.6243466 >>6243342 Huh. Didn't realize you hated faggots so much. Whodathunk.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 19:56:44 2015 No.6243533 >>6243342 Advocating for weakness is different than helping the weak; helping the weak is still predicated upon them BEING weak, and weakness consisting of a lack or privation of some ability, feature, quality, or fortune. Stupid faggot.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 20:24:11 2015 No.6243681 Is there anything really easily arguable about Freud? Who has done the best counter arguments to Freud's incest/fetish arguments?

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 20:28:37 2015 No.6243702 >>6243681 wait wat

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 20:32:06 2015 No.6243716 >>6243702 I'm asking if there are any good reads about someone shitting on Freud's ideas about incest and fetishism

Anonymous Sun Mar 8 20:36:02 2015 No.6243736

>>6243681

Due to his methodology there just isn't really any reason to take what he says seriously, he would just posit what ever coke fueled delusions he had at the time as "science" and people would eat it up whether being critical of it because the label " scientific" meant to them that they could dogmatically accept it.

Anonymous Sun Mar 8 22:57:17 2015 No.6244260
File: 1.42 MB, 244x233, 1420929124425.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>6238793
>Do you realize how unpleasant it is to be called a retard by a retard? Imagine if someone stuck you in a room with a drooling retard who kept questioning your decisions. That's what it's like when someone who is actually smart reads something written by you.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 23:02:16 2015 No.6244274 I'm shocked that mouthbreather had the energy to keep posting the same "OPPRESSION BAD" posts over and over. It must take a lot of energy trying to put it into new words each time.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 9 00:21:55 2015 No.6244586 >>6238465 Worst/stupidest/most insane philosophies thread? I'll finish. >FUCKING OP >SERIOUSLY, WHAT THE FUCK

Anonymous Mon Mar 9 01:11:24 2015 No.6244735

>>6244274

You don't get it man.

He's a real human being, he really cares about eliminating the suffering of the humanity, he's not a wolf in sheep's clothing, or at best a foolish teenager, like basically everyone else who has ever struck that pose in the history of human history ever.

Anonymous Mon Mar 9 01:17:49 2015 No.6244744

>>6244735

lol srsly. this guy is like a court jester. the best part is that he seems genuinely unaware of how childish, hypocritical, and baseless his thinking is.

OP has all the marks of a teenager who just recently started reading, and is fumbling with ideas that are over his head.

Advanced search
Text to find
Subject [?]Search by post subject. Leave empty for any.
Username [?]Search for user name. Leave empty for any user name.
Tripcode [?]Search for tripcode. Leave empty for any.
Email [?]Search by email. Leave empty for any.
Filename [?]Search by image filename. Leave empty for any.
From Date [?]Enter what date to start searching from. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
To Date [?]Enter what date to start searching until. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
Image hash
Search in	All Posts OPs Only
Deleted posts	Show all posts Show only deleted posts Only show non-deleted posts
Internal posts	Show all posts Show only internal posts Show only archived posts
Order	New posts first Old posts first
Capcode	All Posts Only by Users Only by Mods Only by Admins Only by Developers
Results	Posts Threads
Action	[ Simple ]

/lit/ - Literature