[ Rules ] [ ot / g / m ] [ pt / snow / w ] [ meta ] [ Server Status ]

/ot/ - off-topic

Name
Email
Subject
Comment
File(20 MB max)
Video
Password (For post deletion)

The site maintenance is completed but lingering issues are expected, please report any bugs here

File: 1560991814610.jpg (78.3 KB, 674x506, Arthur-Schopenhauer.jpg)

No. 423809

What philosophers are farmers into? how do you all see the world? I used to be really into philosophy but my attention span has been pretty bad recently, so I'm mostly just skimming over the ones I've already read.

>>Meme philosophers

>Descartes
is pretty bad outside of the three meditations he's most famous for. The latter meditations are absolute christian sophistry and go against the skepticism he's most famous for
>Edgy French fagits
Camus and Sartre come across to me as pretentious whiners, a lot of their writing is long winded, self serving and bloated. The obfuscation and sophistry I picked up reading the myth of Sisyphus pretty much stopped me from continuing. I also dislike how they basically play up the whole bohemian philosopher thing in their personal lives, it comes across as insincere posing, most people grow out of that shit in their teens and early twenties.
>Kant
Not a meme philosopher, I'm just too stupid to understand the critique of pure reason. But all the philosophers I like praise him highly, and he's considered to be essential, so like, I dunno.

>>Gud philosophers

>EPIK-TEETUS and Marcus Aurelius
Good for practical solutions and simply written. A few assumptions must be made (God exists, the universe is logical, etc). But reading these guys puts my life into perspective and helps me through my day
>Hume and the other British empiricists
Well structured, well written and easy to understand. They're enjoyable reads. Hume especially stands out as the strongest of the empiricists.
>Schopenhauer
'The world as Will and Representation' is pretty cool, ties into Buddhism and Hinduism, built off the metaphysics of Kant and creates an elaborate and radical interpretation of reality that covers every single subject. Perhaps the most pessimistic philosopher that ever existed, but it's not 'woe is me' self wankery like with Camus.

No. 423818

None. Philosophy is mostly for neet males who jack off to chinese cartoons and call people npcs online nowadays. Waste of time imo.

No. 423850

>>423818
This. Pseudo pretentious bs, it's been talked about here before. Learn a real subject that's meaningful and valuable.

No. 423858

>>423818
It's true

No. 423970

>>423818
I thought I was the only one with this view of philosophy nowadays.

No. 424007

>>423809
>Edgy French fagots like Sartre
Oh my god I agree… Sartre is just re-heated atheist Kierkegaard. His plays are okay though.

>Kant

I like Kant. He had a weirdly modernistic way of viewing philosophy. Using reason to see reason's failures.

>>Gud philosophers

Wittgenstein! I also love modern philosophers who dwelve into other subjects like art and sociology ie Walter Benjamin, Herbert Marcuse, Theodor Adorno (almost all of Frankfurt School tbh) and some french philosophers like Althusser and Guy Debord. I like Foucault because he made some really interesting points but I'm kinda becoming disgusted by him because of all the tumblrfags who havent read him and just meme him out.

No. 424325

>>423818
I'll admit being biased towards this view. I like stoicism but I can't say any other philosophical text has really convinced me one way or the other or been personally beneficial on an individual level.

The only philosophy I've been keen on is political philosophy, not sure if we can talk much about it on lolcow since its a pretty apolitical place. I like Henry George fwiw.

No. 424327

>>423818
lol those pseudo philosophers come from both sides of the political spectrum idiot, but i agree, came here to say pretty much the same thing

No. 424328

>>424327
They definitely do, but it's experiencing a particularly obnoxious revival on the right

No. 424339

>Kant
>Not a meme philosopher, I'm just too stupid to understand the critique of pure reason.
Why make a thread if you don't even get the basics?
This whole thing reads like r/iamverysmart.

No. 424347

>>423850
>Learn a real subject that's meaningful and valuable.

What is meaningful and valuable?

No. 424351

hegel sucks

No. 424388

>>424351
I like his writings on aesthetics!

No. 424390

File: 1561124170606.png (9.67 KB, 215x235, download.png)

Thoughts on Stirner?

No. 424395

I've recently started getting into philosophy, working my way up chronologically.
So far I'm pretty fond of the stoics, Epicurus, Boethius and Thomas More.
I hated reading Descartes because of his trademark argument, I don't mind when works discuss religion, I just hate how he presented it as irrefutable truth and anyone who disagrees isn't paying enough attention.
Based on this, could anyone recommend me any philosophers/books I could be interested in?

No. 424400

>>424347
Nta but literally anything besides philosophy. It's worthless. Reading user license agreements is a better way to waste your time.

No. 424411

>>424400
We get it, you don't give shit about philosophy. Stop posting in the thread if you're not going to add anything valuable.

No. 424457

>>424400
What makes other things more valuable?

No. 424549

File: 1561146598330.jpg (149.33 KB, 800x979, Frans_Hals_-_Portret_van_RenĂ©_…)

>>424347
Economics, computer science, biology, physics, even "soft" sciences like sociology or psychology.
Philosophy dates back from a time when formal sciences weren't a thing. Its initial purpose was to understand the world which is why a lot of ancient philosophers also did maths or medecine.
What was worthy about their philosophic work has already made its way into formal science (for example Descartes' scientific method), the rest is mostly mental masturbation on ethics, God, and conscience, and often riddled with misogyny for many philosophers.

No. 424555

>>424549
>psychology

Opinion disregarded.

No. 424558

>>424555
Sure neckbeard-kun.

No. 424568

>>424390
Not sure why lefties meme him so much since his writings can apply to really any other philosophy if they have desired outcomes. In fact they apply better to capitalism which is more openly self-interest orientated than socialism which is more greater good morality orientated.

No. 424602

I lost one of my best friends to a philosophy PhD. She used to be a lovely person, really creative and a fantastic writer but now she's a bitter jaded cunt who can't even hold a normal conversation. Philosophy, not even once.

No. 424855

I'm really interested in philosophy but I just don't know where to start with really reading deeply into all the different aspects. I've watched videos and read a few articles mostly but that's just surface level stuff. Does anyone recommend good texts/books/figures to start off with?

No. 424861

>>424855
Plato. Plato is really old (so it makes sense to start chronologically in a way) and he's really easy to read.

No. 424865

>>424855
>>424861

1. The Apology
2. Euthyphro
3. Protagoras
4. The Republic

If you enjoyed all of those, philosophy is definitely something for you. The Republic can be a bit boring or strange in the middle though.

No. 425128

>>424347
I'm that anon. Anything else. Lmfao

No. 425575

>>423809
>Descartes
>the skepticism he's most famous for
He was never a skeptic though? The only reason why he initally adapted the skeptic mindset was to refute it. I don't know if I'm missing something here because no one else has mentioned it but that seems like a common misconception to me



Delete Post [ ]
[Return] [Catalog]
[ Rules ] [ ot / g / m ] [ pt / snow / w ] [ meta ] [ Server Status ]