[Looksmax] Bad philosophers

[towncel]

All of Nietzsche boils down to low intelligence shizo-analysis which reduces every conflict or topic to one side's desire for revenge, which is allegedly objectively immoral, versus the noble and life-affirming and fate-loving masters. In order to genuinely think 70%+ of his books aren't just time-wasting slop there to fill in the space, you would have to be a literal drooling mongoloid (such as honest aka magnifique). Nietzsche made no statement, made nothing new or original, hated on plato while copying him verbatim, and just as he says and advocates for, there are no arguments in Nietzsche, only the claim that he is aligned with the state, that he is aligned with fate, which is objectively good. Everything you do to rebel against anything in life is a sign of weakness. Rebellion against the state is considered the most absolute ultimate poisonous sinful and low activity. Even though, ironically, reading Nietzsche (or Cioran) after working out literally feels like a poison running through your body that is about to kill you and possess your brain, replacing it with mush.

[Altruist]

everyone cringing at nietzsche and his midwit fanboys is automatically smart in my book

[Sexual chocolate]

nigga watched an uberboyo episode

[Honest]

i'm reading the gay science atm. it's super good

[MysteriousWeeb420]

Bad philosopher is an oxymoron. 

All thinking is good no matter how retarded

[Sexual chocolate]

Bad philosopher is an oxymoron. 

All thinking is good no matter how retarded

[psychoman]

who?
i only know one philosopher, khayyam. its simple, he says just enjoy life get drunk and enjoy JBs (probably)
nothing else matters.

fr tho, i think philosophy is just waste product of language. language was evolved to transfer solid information, about hows and whens not whys.

[slop slinger]

what's your take on nietzsche's philosophy of the relation of affect and representation

what's your take on Nietzsche's contribution to the hermeneutics of suspicion

In what ways do you think the Deleuzian generation of philosophers in France  correctly and incorrectly intepreted Niezsche's theory of affect

In what ways if any do you think the relationship between lexis and logos in Nietzsche's early lectures on rhetoric inform his later theories of music in The Birth of Tragedy and beyond

To what extent do you think Nietzsche's understanding of voice in his lectures on rhetoric are original vs. an appropriation of Gustav Gerber's Die Sprache und das Erkennen


Actually forget all that. God isn't actually dead kek

[slop slinger]

what's your take on paul drost's reading of the paradox of mimesis in nietzsche

[Honest]

fr tho, i think philosophy is just waste product of language. language was evolved to transfer solid information, about hows and whens not whys.

is it ironic that you give a "why" to justify your explanation? 

anyway, this is reasonably common theme in philosophy. nietzsche mentions the evolutionary utility of language to attack our concepts of logic. wittgenstein also concerns himself with the utility of language and its inability to meaningfully address philosophical abstractions

Wittgenstein:

Most propositions and questions, that have been written about philosophical matters, are not false, but senseless. We cannot, therefore, answer questions of this kind at all, but only state their senselessness. Most questions and propositions of the philosophers result from the fact that we do not understand the logic of our language. (They are of the same kind as the question whether the Good is more or less identical than the Beautiful.) And so it is not to be wondered at that the deepest problems are really no problems.
TLP, 4.003

Nietzsche:

Those, for example, who did not know how to find often enough what is "equal" as regards both nourishment and hostile animals-those, in other words, who subsumed things too slowly and cautiously-were favored with a lesser probability of survival than those who guessed immediately upon encountering similar instances that they must be equal. The dominant tendency, however, to treat as equal what is merely similar-an illogical tendency, for nothing is really equal-is what first created any basis for logic. 
[...]
At bottom, every high degree of caution in making inferences and every skeptical tendency constitute a great danger for life.
[...]
No living beings would have survived if the apposite tendency-to affirm rather than suspend judgment, to err and make up things rather than wait, to assent rather than negate, to pass judgment rather than be just-had not been bred to the point where it became extraordinarily strong.
GS, 111

In every chemical process, for example, quality appears as a "miracle," as ever; also, every locomotion; nobody has "explained" a push. But how could we possibly explain anything? We operate only with things that do not exist: lines, planes, bodies, atoms, divisible time spans, divisible spaces. How should explanations be at all possible when we first turn everything into an image, our image!
GS 112

[Altruist]

Bad philosopher is a pleonasm. 

fixed

[psychoman]

is it ironic that you give a "why" to justify your explanation? 

anyway, this is reasonably common theme in philosophy. nietzsche mentions the evolutionary utility of language to attack our concepts of logic. wittgenstein also concerns himself with the utility of language and its inability to meaningfully address philosophical abstractions

Wittgenstein:

Nietzsche:

yes it is. but what can you do. at the end of day, i'm not giving you any information about where the food/shelter/water is.
0 survival information will be transferred, it's like jerking off each other's brain.

philosophy is probably entirely made for coping with the inevitable death.

[eldajaal1488]

idk what he really is like but i just assume hes retarded edgelord

[Honest]

philosophy is probably entirely made for coping with the inevitable death.

youre continuing to philosophise

[prince of shitskins]

famous black philosophers