[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 40 KB, 357x400, wittgenstein-3.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6783647 No.6783647 [Reply] [Original]

Who are the most mature and hardcore-tier philosophers?
If I could pick I would say Hegel, Wittgenstein, Heidegger, Derrida, Schopenhauer, and Adorno.
Who else should I buy?

>> No.6783651

why don't you read them and then make a thread about what you've read instead of this

>> No.6783659

>>6783651
Because I want others to read?
I have read them, and want more.

>> No.6783663

>buy

>> No.6783692

presocratics

>> No.6783696

>>6783647
Stoics

>> No.6783699

Is /lit/ aware of analytic philosophers outside of Wittgenstein?

>> No.6783705

>>6783647
Rousseau's Confessions.

It's what actual maturity looks like rather than intellectualizing every mundane aspect of life.

>> No.6783710

>>6783696
An interesting quasi-cult developed in Rome that's become fetishized by right-wing ideologues that know nothing about philosophy. Not very hardcore-tier, and not very mature either considering most modern adherents follow Stoic philosophy from an ideological grounding rather than from philosophical investigation.

>>6783699
Yes, but when you revolutionize the way the Western world looks at language twice, you're going to be a hotter topic of interest than others

>>6783647
What have you read, OP?

>> No.6783713
File: 16 KB, 251x300, aristotle_educated_mind.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6783713

START

>> No.6783715
File: 9 KB, 194x259, plato.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6783715

WITH

>> No.6783717
File: 55 KB, 431x450, socrates.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6783717

THE

>> No.6783718

>>6783717
CUCKS

>> No.6783725

>>6783710
>An interesting quasi-cult developed in Rome that's become fetishized by right-wing ideologues that know nothing about philosophy. Not very hardcore-tier, and not very mature either considering most modern adherents follow Stoic philosophy from an ideological grounding rather than from philosophical investigation.

Nah.

>> No.6783731

>>6783710
>judging a philosophy based on its followers
I think stoicism is retarded but come the fuck on

>> No.6783739

>>6783710
But I'm a left-anarchist extremely inspired by the stoics, who incorporates their ethical ideas into a reconstructionist Hermetic religious framework.

>> No.6783775

>>6783725
Yah

>>6783731
I'm pretty sure the only reason it was mentioned in this thread was because the OP said "mature". I mean it's definitely not a difficult school to become familiar with. The anon that posted it did so under the implication that Stoicism is an emotionally mature philosophy, but the OP seemed more interested in an intellectually mature philosophy. It was mentioned only out of adherence to an ideological belief that Stoicism is emotionally mature, which is first of all epistemologically subjective and second of all just ideological posturing.

>>6783739
Well that's certainly caught my interest. I only mentioned the right-wing in particular because Stoicism is the resident philosophy of /pol/

>> No.6783792

>>6783775
whole lotta pedantic hair-splitting about a decidedly masculine philosophy. go figure

practical philosophy master race. muh analytics

>> No.6783946

>>6783775
Holy shit, you're so new and pretentious that it shines all the way up to the Capitol Hill.

>> No.6783952
File: 274 KB, 2400x960, Sammy.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6783952

>Who are the most mature and hardcore-tier philosophers?
there is one that towers above all others, pic related

>> No.6783966

>>6783952

Isn't that the actor from the film Night at the Museum?

>> No.6784109
File: 105 KB, 739x742, 4u.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6784109

>>6783946
>all these insults
>he still can't prove me wrong

>> No.6784128

>>6783647
>Schopenhauer
He's out of place in that list OP. I love him but he's not nearly as complicated or exit-level as the others. I think Adorno is probably a tier below the others too.

>> No.6784562

>>6784128
Who else should be then

>> No.6784574

>>6784562
Blanchot, Ricoeur, etc. But classifying thinkers in this way is stupid.

>> No.6784631

Laozi

>> No.6786802

>>6784574
>shows off his dick for comparison purposes
>says dick comparisons are stupid.
ok buddy.

>> No.6786804

Me.

>> No.6786807

Your mom. She's thinking about my cock all of the time

>> No.6786811

>>6783647
The hardest to understand has to be Husserl (not all his work, but some are really incredibly unreadable).

As for the most mature, I would say Hegel.

>> No.6786829

>>6783659
>having read Hegel, Wittgenstein, Heidegger, Derrida, Schopenhauer and Adorno
>still making these shit threads

How does it feel to be an absolute fuckwit?

Just to be clear, I understand perfectly you have ready absolutely nothing by these authors.

>> No.6786834

>>6786802
Just because I think anon's thread is stupid doesn't mean I didn't understand what he was looking for.

>> No.6786965

>>6783739
elfette is that you

>> No.6787034

>>6783952
literally not even a philosopher

>> No.6787149

>>6783717
>>6783718
Socrates looks like Louis CK

>> No.6787354

Someone rec me some harcore Eastern philosophers?

>> No.6787926

>>6787354
Nagarjuna

>> No.6788825

witty