/lit/ - Literature

>>19074446
he has been edified and added to.

Repeatedly

>>19074467
lmao of course the tranny seethes against Hobbes

>>19074446
Rousseau was most correct when he noted that the printing press was a mistake because it allowed Hobbes to publish his trash. Hobbes makes the same mistakes as Marx and he's a disgusting materialist who gaslights all people by attaching unspoken motives to their actions. The state of nature being a state of war is just as incomplete as all history being a history of class warfare. Men arrange societies because we're political beings, not for solely pragmatic reasons.

>>19074446
God I want the Leviathan to fuck me

>>19074493
You have me confused with some guy.
I’m not him, whoever he is.

>>19074528
No I mean you, the hedonist anarchist tranny
>His-story
Imagina actually putting this in your book title

>>19074540
>Imagine using a play on words for a title! OWOOOOOOOOOH
No, you’re definitely confused. I’m trans anything, and negative-hedonism isn’t quite the same as hedonism

>>19074602
No need to make it so obvious, tranny
How did the Leviathman hurt you?

>>19074528
how does this book refute hobbes exactly?

>>19074540
>Imagine using a play on words for a title! OWOOOOOOOOOH
No, you’re definitely confused. I’m NOT trans anything, and negative-hedonism isn’t quite the same as hedonism

>19074617
>this unaware
Read the book, maybe? Oh, you don’t read.

>>19074629
>Oh
did YOU read it? why dont you give us a quick run down?

>>19074629
No need to make it so obvious, tranny
How did the Leviathman hurt you?

>>19074625
I hear Rousseau already refuted him, William Blake, but most I’m most familiar with Thomas Paine. And Bill Watterson.
Perlman just shows the obvious. Hobbes was born into a small world with narrow vision. He chose to kiss its ass like so many others. Which is why you like him. He’s just as cowardly.

>>19074655
so what you're saying is you cant actually explain how this book refuted hobbes then. have you even red hobbes or the book you are4 claiming refutes him?

>the absolute state of /lit/

>>19074655
>Hobbes was born into a small world with narrow vision.
You are delusional

>>19074655
>completely dodging the question
butters....

>>19074636
Because I have to go back to work now. Irony?

>>19074655
Typos because I’m in a hurry

>>19074668
Hurrying

>>19074673
He was

>>19074679
Please, please stop posting. Forever.

>>19074679
kinda funny how you can shitpost here all day every day but the moment someone pressures you on anything you suddenly have to leave

>>19074518
Rousseau was a retard who, to quote a certain Frenchman, "employed so much intellect to persuade men to be beasts." and indeed behind his facade of scholarship he was beastly and begot child after child on his maid only to condemn them to death in a knowingly diseased foster system. What kind of cur would talk of political leanings or the primacy of groups and good in man who cannot even comport himself in a manner befitting a human being? All of it is a sham at best and a dualistic schizophrenia at worst. He has nothing to say but wishful platitudes that demean the real and disturb the good.

>>19074446
>Has Hobbes ever been refuted?
I'd say the success of Jews in general is ample evidence that the keeping of contracts is particularly useful or necessary.

>>19074698
>He has nothing to say but wishful platitudes
a perfect idol for an anarchist

>>19074672
>tfw don't even leave breadcrumbs
I don't understand why the mods don't ban this trannyfaggot, using a trip at all times is directly against the rules and is just attention whoring faggotry.

>>19074446
No and Nietzsche's critique of him shows that he cannot be taken seriously.

>>19074461
Basically this

>>19074679
Oh butters you're adorable

>>19074731
You have to misunderstand pretty deeply to think he disagrees with Hobbes.

>>19074675
classic butters

>>19074705
what did he mean by this

>>19074689
Kinda funny how you can type in plain English, but ye can’t seem to be able to read it. I said I had to go to work. On top of that, I have on several occasions been able to debate for what I know in the past. You mocking tone is of course just sour grapes.

>>19074625
>[H]ow does this book refute hobbes exactly?
By showing how the state emerged and ripped humanity from its natural conditions. “Mmyeah, but how eggsactly?” It’s a long-ish book. Am I supposed to read it to you?
Hobbes conceit is that pre “civilization” humanity lived all those millions of years in "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short" [lived] conditions. Well, the guy didn’t know about modern anthropology, evolutionary theory and paleontology, so we can forgive him for not having the imagination enough understand that “civilization” is the opposite of what it pretends to be. All so-called civilizations produced conditions that were/are poor, nasty, brutish, often leads to solitude and shortening of ones life. Should I highlight how this is so? Do you lack the imagination to see this fact?

>>19074744
He hates Hobbes and Locke and Hume. Nietzsche is an illiterate anglophobic midwit.

>>19077525
I wrote an essay on the topic comparing and contrasting the lockian and hobbsian veiw on the nature of the "natural state of man". I posted a decent bit of it here like 2 years ago.

Its been a while, but one seemed to try and real in the natural anrachic nature of man, while the other wanted society to be as close to it as possible. Both faced a conundrem of what happens when two peoples "rights" conflict with one another and the idea of property arose. (then I made a suposition how the lockian model may have influenced some dictitorial lines of thought in the vein of a napoleon, while the lockian thought influenced liberalism in the vein of the burgeoning US, but that was not hard and fast)

>Hobbes conceit is that pre “civilization” humanity lived all those millions of years in "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short" [lived] conditions
thats not incorrect at all. tribal warfare was horribly brutal in terms of percentages lost along with other ailments of primeval near animality. it wasnt much different from how groups of social animals interact, that is to say, tenuous. There can be an argument made that we are more psychologically adapt to that sort of living though. But then that begs the question of if a dog is happier or a wolf.
I dont think thats really a refutation of Hobbes though and more of an alternative conception. I think both models of thought (both are less scientific, but more in terms of the thought experiment of how man indiviguized compares and relates to man in connection)


Not the other guy you were responding to butters. I dont always agree with you, but I apreciate you sometimes put in some work and talk about this stuff.

>>19077525
so what is your real, viable plan that you have to return the human race to living like cave people indefinitely?

>>19077622
>Both faced a conundrem of what happens when two peoples "rights" conflict with one another and the idea of property arose
The facts of property, stated pretty amusingly by Stirner, is that it’s whatever one can hold. It’s a rotten deal to pretend you can have vast nations worth with a band of thugs… but here we have it. Modern “civility” stealing lands for states causes a nasty brutish end to so many and it always has.
Two peoples rights had always been worked out in one way or another by pre-civ peoples and your assumptions about “tribal warfare” being worse than WWII is astoundingly absurd. I take offense, but mean none to you, just really disagree

>>19077713
>it’s whatever one can hold
so your idea of an ideal civilization is "might is right" and an orgy of violence where everyone takes and holds on to what they can?

>>19077716
>>19077713
its completely correct though

>>19077702
Not possible. We have to understand the prison we’re living in has to be peeled off in a methodical fashion. This generation will want less radical changes as the next. There will be some who will want to live without electricity, many will not, but maybe their numbers will grow later. Not for me to decide. But that’s at the heart of it. I want everyone to be able to decide this through direct democracy. We’ll live better that way

>>19077722
people can already decide to live without electricity or live according to whatever alternative lifestyle

>>19077713
>our assumptions about “tribal warfare” being worse than WWII is astoundingly absurd.
in terms of proportion killed/wounded, yes. The trauam of it might be more harshly felt due to the magnitude of it though, so there are different lenses of appreciating it.
>The facts of property, stated pretty amusingly by Stirner, is that it’s whatever one can hold.
not too different from either Hobbes or locke from what I remember. But what do if you have an apple tree you tend to harvest then someone else comes and does the same with a finite number of apples. I think its a product of that one concept of finite resource management with a number of active entities. forgot what its called. that alagory with a bunch of farmers with their sheep in a communal feild where eventually one farmer tries to get more grass, causing the rest to get more grass in response. I always forget it.

>>19074744
IDK if he does or does not agree with Hobbes. He literally called him grumpy and seethed about how Hobbes said laughter was for midwits. It was pathetic.

>>19077754
>laughter was for midwits
kek

>>19077769
midwit

>>19077836
I am aware.

>>19074731
>search Hobbes in Nietzsche Source
>3 results
>one of them just shitpost making fun of English to support his francophilia
>the other one picking out a quote
What criticism of Hobbes exactly is there that Nietzsche formulated?

>>19074744
>You have to misunderstand pretty deeply to think he disagrees with Hobbes.
Nietzsche was deeply deterministic so yes it could easily be argued he agreed with Hobbes' microscopic view of organizing reality.

Hobbes was based. Wrote the best translation of the iliad and odyssey as well

Based Butters dabbing on leviathancucks yet again. Perlman obliterates Hobbes before he even begins the main narrative of his book.

>>19074540
>Imagina actually putting this in your book title

imagine having your consciousness completely algorithmicized by /pol/ memes. imagine thinking perlman was writing some feminist screed. americans are a disease.

>>19077721
urboid cuck miserabilism, klages rightfully diagnosed this view as a symptom of the disease that is progressivism and its own universalization of violence

>We recall that the ancients dreamt of a lost
“Golden Age,” or “paradise,” a realm wherein the lion would lie down with the lamb, and the serpent would dwell with man as his protective spirit. Even this idea is not so utterly fantastic as the false doctrine that teaches us that all of nature is perpetually in the grip of a ceaseless “struggle for existence.”

>The scientists who study the polar regions tell us of the fearless intimacy with which penguins, reindeers, sea lions, seals, and sea-gulls greet the first appearance of man. Pioneers who have explored the tropical regions never fail to amaze us with the images they communicate, especially those which pertain to the moment in which these students first perceive, arrayed in peaceful cohabitation, swarms of wild geese, cranes, ibis, flamingoes, herons, storks, marabous, giraffes, zebras, gnus, antelopes, and gazelles. We understand completely the true symbiosis that embraces the entire animal kingdom, and which extends throughout the entire planet.

>However, as soon as the man of “progress” arrives on the scene, he announces his masterful presence by spreading death and the horror of death all around him.

>>19078686
Truly the only answer is for humanity to kill itself

>>19078720
I agree, but I'll settle for a mass die off.