What philosophers/philosophy books are worth reading?

[Not A Cat Person]

 

[Red Saltire]

Ver archivo adjunto 8926193

I haven’t read Hegel but the sense I get from people who really know philosophy is that he’s very difficult but ultimately pretty important. There are a lot of French faggots whose writings are impenetrable on purpose and ultimately have nothing to offer.

 

[AMHOLIO]

Ver archivo adjunto 8926193

Speaking of Schopenhauer:

 

[Red Saltire]

I think he also kicked his elderly landlady down a flight of stairs and was sued for it, paying out a verdict until she died.

 

[Red Saltire]

Hume and Kant ended philosophy as a serious discipline. You can read the philosophers who came after them if you want, but there's not much of a reason to.

What do you mean? People are still responding to Kant.

 

[AMHOLIO]

People are still responding to Kant.

I guess when it comes to Kant, some people just... kan't.

 

[Arthur_Schopenhauer]

I think he also kicked his elderly landlady down a flight of stairs and was sued for it, paying out a verdict until she died.

The old crone was a whore making whore-noises and deserved it for disturbing me when I was writing the third edition of Parega and Palipomena.

Ver archivo adjunto 8926193

Hegel can be summed up with a tale like those of Borges or even Lovecraft.

Imagine god (hegel called god "spirit" but hegel was a fag) he is alone and all powerful but is not all knowing while he has tons of good ideas in his mind he does not know how they are related between them or the full meaning and implications of them (just like when you listen to linkin park and think of two dudes fighting and dropping epic one liners, but you don't know why those two dudes are beating each other and dropping said epic quotes).

So the "spirit" decides to create a bad fanfic, it starts with a dude living in the jungle, he was born in the jungle and has not seen another human in his entire life, said dude is a self insert of "spirit" that is also alone.
Our dude lives in peace, while he has to fight nature, nature does not know hate or ressentment so our dude does neither, he does as he pleases unless nature forces him not to (you can't fight a gorilla no matter how much you want to do it) he also does not use language (why should he, he has not seen nobody to use it with).
Then our bad copy of tarzan (donut steel OC) finds another dude that is in the same situation as him, they act the same way they act when they see another animal and fight each other, the stronger one takes the weak one as his slave, civilization is born.
Language is invented as the master has to boss his slave around, the slave discovers what hate is (he was "free" before meeting his master now he has to work in order to feed both his master and him) he also starts to develop tools and technology as in order to feed both the master and himself.
The master as he does not have to work and has all his needs sated by his slave becomes fat and lazy.
At some point the slave kills his master and runs away.
The slave finds another dudes who are in a similar situation as him, the group of runnaway slaves decides to cooperate in order to survive.
As the only form of government they know is buckbreaking slavery they decide to practice it, at first the stronger more skilled slave becomes the master and the others let him buckbroke them because the leadership of the strongest archives common prosperity.
At some point the elite degenerates into fat faggots
At some point somebody decides to try democracy
Eventually democracy becomes corrupt and ruled by rich fags
Another more advanced group of people invades them...

This process is called "dialectics". The spirit starts with a very simple plot, is essentially a dude fighting gorillas in the jungle, then it introduces another dude which "negates" our plot, it stops being about a fag fighting gorillas and now it's dragon ball, then we get a resolution that combines the original plot and its negation: one dude has to fight off nature in order to survive while also being exploited by a fat dude (wow we even have misery porn and le epic social commentary, the spirit is in his angsty teeen phase, so heckin epic reddit).
This process repeats at infinitum: We start at situation A, then said situation is subverted and at some point a combination of situation A, its epic subversion and new "innovations" and social commenatary nobody asked for.
Eventually the "spirit" will stop being an angsty teen that writes bad fanfic about eternal war, and darkness and a future that only has war and misery and darkness and decides that war is not cool and people die so he should better write a comfy slice of life anime of cute girls doing cute things where nobody gets hurt and bullied and everybody is friends with each other (just like girls und panzer, there are tanks from the previous stage of development filled with war and pain but now people just use them as toys)

According to hegel his process is logical, the lone dude on the jungle eventually by pure logic would have encountered another dude, the master becoming fat is logical as he does not know anything other than fighting for survival once he stops doing it he does the most logical thing that is rest and eat, the slave rebelling is also logical once he sees the stronger dude becoming fat and non threatening: think of it as the spirit re-reading his bad fanfic and deciding to apply logic and logistics (like a redditor) to dissect the plot because it does not makes sense so he decides to add things that make more sense in order to destroy the things that does not make them (why should a fat faggot rule over a more capable slave, eventually that inconsistency should be destroyed).

I call it a fanfic because just like fanfics are based on previous material, the ideas that the spirit uses to create his tale existed previously just like plato said.

Oh and according to hegel this "dialectics" applies to everything, the entire history of mankind, the entire history of philosophy, the entire history of religion, the entire history of art, physics, biology, anime, helicopters... (do not read hegel's books on science they are stupid even for hegelian standards, not even hegelians read them)

If you ask why the fuck should I care about hegel you have to consider that without hegel we wouldn't have:

• Commies
• Those weird technocultist that believe in super AGI
• Accelerationists like nick land
• Those fucking redditors (god I hate them) that speak of "the right side of history"
• ¿Trannies?
• The WEF (you will own nothing and be happy)
• Nazis
• The schizos on /lit/
• Girls und panzer

Thank you for reading all this shit and remember that if you are sad it's the fault of the "spirit" (not the demiurge, hegel was original and donut steel OC and didn't just worship the demiurge) and his bad sonic fanfics.

 

[AMHOLIO]

Commies

Girls und panzer

That's a great argument to kill all Hegel fans right there.

 

[Gravekeeper's Vassal]

Industrial Society and Its Future by Theodore Kaczynski

 

[Arthur_Schopenhauer]

I haven’t read Hegel but the sense I get from people who really know philosophy is that he’s very difficult but ultimately pretty important. There are a lot of French faggots whose writings are impenetrable on purpose and ultimately have nothing to offer.

A better summary of my previous shitpost that i wrote while in the toilet:

The demiurge is good and extremately autistic, the entire of human history is just him doing a bad fanfic and as any sensitive kid maturing psychologically while he creates and improves his "" masterpiece"" the ending is spoiler: the good guys win and create a utopia.

 

[CasketBase]

Trick question, none of them.

Lol'd at somebody unironically suggesting (((Ayn Rand))).
Like Marx, she was a loser with delusions of grandeur. Maximalist, entitled, ultimately superflous and redundant, only good for radicalizing young retards into being even bigger retards.
One the level of Shlomo Judkovsky, both of them.

Diogenes best philosopher IMO.
Yea, gooning in a town square in broad daylight was weird as fuck, but the man was a troll committed to his bit, what can I say.

 

[AMHOLIO]

A better summary of my previous shitpost that i wrote while in the toilet:

The demiurge is good and extremately autistic, the entire of human history is just him doing a bad fanfic and as any sensitive kid maturing psychologically while he creates and improves his "" masterpiece"" the ending is spoiler: the good guys win and create a utopia.

Yea, gooning in a town square in broad daylight was weird as fuck,

Taking this out of context and saying "Oh a farmer approved philosopher WOULD be gooing in broad daylight" because it's funny.

 

[Anime Waifu NFT collector]

Oh and according to hegel this "dialectics" applies to everything, the entire history of mankind, the entire history of philosophy, the entire history of religion, the entire history of art, physics, biology, anime, helicopters... (do not read hegel's books on science they are stupid even for hegelian standards, not even hegelians read them)

That doesn't sound right, according to the logic of Hegel history should always move forward and things should always become better, how would this thinking explain Iran being way more liberal in the past compared to now being a shithole controlled by terrorists? That is just one example, there are plenty of examples of civilizations that were advanced and were destroyed through conquest, not necessarily civilization but this happened with cities all the time where a group (such as the Mongols) would kill 98% of the population and burn all the books and shit.

It also sounds like an unfalsifiable hypothesis, if the hypothesis is that we will eventually move forward as a species, then this will always happen unless humanity goes extinct, we could even nuke ourselves back to the middle ages and eventually advance to a technological point more advanced than now given enough time (which would prove his hypothesis correct despite the setback), so how can his "constant progress" theory be proven wrong? Also it doesn't sound deep to me to say that when something exist (such as an idea) there are things that oppose it, how is that deep?

 

[Soup Sammiches]

The only philosopher you need is Alfred E Neuman.

 

[Arthur_Schopenhauer]

That doesn't sound right, according to the logic of Hegel history should always move forward and things should always become better, how would this thinking explain Iran being way more liberal in the past compared to now being a shithole controlled by terrorists? That is just one example, there are plenty of examples of civilizations that were advanced and were destroyed through conquest, not necessarily civilization but this happened with cities all the time where a group (such as the Mongols) would kill 98% of the population and burn all the books and shit.

It also sounds like an unfalsifiable hypothesis, if the hypothesis is that we will eventually move forward as a species, then this will always happen unless humanity goes extinct, we could even nuke ourselves back to the middle ages and eventually advance to a technological point more advanced than now given enough time (which would prove his hypothesis correct despite the setback), so how can his "constant progress" theory be proven wrong? Also it doesn't sound deep to me to say that when something exist (such as an idea) there are things that oppose it, how is that deep?

Trust the plan the spirit always goes forward.

Yeah hegel was a retard.

 

[Rainbow Child]

Aquinas is to Aristotle as Aristotle was to Plato. And every best case since has been an afterthought.

His anatomisation of desire feeding ire feeding intellect feeding will is the antidote to modernist notions of freedom (which are really slavery to the appetite, when true freedom is the capacity to choose good over bad).

 

[Sneaky lurker]

I was reading the republic but some retarded digitized it wrong and the book started going backwards at the middle.

 

[Jarch6]

It also sounds like an unfalsifiable hypothesis

It sounds like that because that’s precisely what it is! All results get pigeonholed into dialectal wankery meaning our pet theories (e.g., Marxism) never get threatened.

Aquinas is to Aristotle as Aristotle was to Plato. And every best case since has been an afterthought.

His anatomisation of desire feeding ire feeding intellect feeding will is the antidote to modernist notions of freedom (which are really slavery to the appetite, when true freedom is the capacity to choose good over bad).

If you’re interested in Aquinas you gotta add Augustine in too (also the Bible, of course). Greeks also are good background info. In general you can’t go wrong with the Plato, Aristotle, etc. for background info, every learned man was well versed in them back in the day.

 

[Rainbow Child]

every learned man was well versed in them back in the day.

There's a reason that "they" removed Greek and Latin from the curriculum.

I made the mistake of trying to have an intelligent conversation with an academic protestor recently. I quickly learned that he didn't have even the most basic fundamentals (e.g. he didn't know the difference between reality and phenomenology, and refused the usefulness, even, of a distinction between the two, because he wanted to maintain "my reality" and "your reality" (without comprehending that his own willfully low-rez conceptuality negated, even, his attempt to change my mind on the topic)).

This wasn't really going to be a debate, it really had to become an education from first principles (and this guy is a leader, sadly). Any attempt to get to the root ideas behind the words he was using merely nominatively was met, echolalialy, with "eTyMoLoGy fAllaCy". Pearls before swine, man; what a waste of my time.

The notion of an NPC is the greatest contribution to philosophy since, I dunno, A Critique of Reason, maybe?

 

[The Crescent King]

I would recommend The Experience of God by David Bentley Hart and Roger Scruton's Beauty. I also like Carl Trueman's The Rise and Triumph of the Modern Self.