/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.21515242]

Anyone else despise philosophy? It's basically self-help slop written by grifters who have accomplished nothing in life but fooling teens into thinking they're intelligent.

[Anonymous No.21515251]

>>21515242
I like when it is fun to read like Zarathustra but otherwise I would prefer scripture and mythology.

[Anonymous No.21515255]

you genuinely have no clue

[Anonymous No.21515260]

>>21515242
>It's basically self-help slop
Elaborate please

[Anonymous No.21515278]

>>21515242
> Anyone else despise philosophy? It's basically self-help slop written by grifters who have accomplished nothing in life but fooling teens into thinking they're intelligent.

[Anonymous No.21515304]

>>21515242
I'll go with Freud's answer:
Most philosphies are prescriptive, but they are the writer's attempt at solving their own neurosis. Any real insight is merely incidental.
Nietzsche's entire corpus is his way of accepting personal failure while believing he was worthy of much more.

There is another answer, supported by my intuition:
Most prescriptive philosophies hide some material and real changes, while the masses fixate on the philosophy itself, debating irrelevant semantics and theories.
So yes, I despise most philosophers and their works.

[Anonymous No.21515336]

Political and moral philosophy that ignores the primacy of biology and kinship is either useless or harmful.

[Anonymous No.21515343]

>>21515242
What must the deprived lives of logicians be that what they write counts as self-help?

[s a g e No.21515383]

>>21515242
oh hey, buddy! i think >>>/v/ is more your speed.

[Anonymous No.21515393]

>>21515304
>Most prescriptive philosophies hide some material and real changes
such as?

[Anonymous No.21515436]

>>21515393
Marxism hides the usurping of power by jewish industrialists.
The various leftisms, like feminism, transgenderism, anti-racism, etc. now hide planted intelligentsia taking over institutions.
Nietzsche, Cromwell, etc. lauded at a time when enthusiastic productivity was required.
Freud, Lacan, etc. promoted to promote a self-directed, introspective, but otherwise totally oblivious and compliant indivual is required.
Various nationalist ideologies promoted when bankers wanted wars.
You get the idea...

[Anonymous No.21515441]

Get better at bait. Or better yet, don't bait at all. -Will.I.Am Shakespeare

[Anonymous No.21515446]

>>21515242
this is the biggest cope I have ever seen by someone who has clearly been filtered. Go suck a nigger dick retard

[Anonymous No.21515452]

>>21515436
ignore the spelling and grammar errors. im phoneposting
contd...
some might say that those in power coopted these philosophies.
that is partially true.
the other side is that these philosophies were an assignment given to those "philosophers" with a specific desired goal.

[Anonymous No.21515459]

>>21515242
How the fuck is mereology about self help?

[Anonymous No.21515465]

>>21515436
seems rather external, no? let Nietzsche be Nietzsche, and Freud Freud. the effects or co-optations exist largely outside of them, merely as interactions with them.
>>21515452
>the other side is that these philosophies were an assignment given to those "philosophers" with a specific desired goal.
you lost me there. seems a bit too tin-foily and simplistic. in any case, where i live these movements are largely remote or felt much later. so i have no need to see them with those eyes. but that kind of thinking somewhat reminds me of TLP (TheLastPsychiatrist).

[Anonymous No.21515469]

>>21515452
you are taking in exam a single parenthesis of time, that is, the 1900s, where philosophies were infamously instrumentalised by various ideologies. What about the prior centuries?

[Anonymous No.21515473]

>>21515446
You literally can't get filtered by philosophy. This is retarded cope. Everyone who says shit like that is a pretentious little fuckwit that every philosopher would hate to see reading their shit. You're not smart, you're not enlightened. You spent 80k on a philosophy degree. You're a retard.

[Anonymous No.21515479]

>>21515473
>filtered

[Anonymous No.21515481]

>>21515465
>seems a bit too tin-foily and simplistic
could be. which is why i said it is supported by my intuition and research into biographies and history.
funny how all of us know the saying:
>never attribute to malice what could be the result of incompetence or ignorance
but the instant you turn it around everyone screams "tin foil!! schizo!!!"
>never attribute to ignorance or incompetence (or in this case, cooptation) what could very well be malice.

[Anonymous No.21515493]

stop reading Neetzsche

[Anonymous No.21515498]

>>21515465
>>21515469
Ok Im back.
Perhaps you should look into the genealogies of the philosophies. You should look into the people and their connections and bloodlines. You will find vested interests and a desire to hide the material effects of those philosphies.
I know, I know, "Schizooo!!!" "Meds!!!" "Anti-semitism!!!!". I know.
Please look into it first. I have found the same MO in almost all philosophies, not just in the 1900s, but even as early as 1500s.
1. Sense the populace is unhappy/unsatisfied in some way.
2. Create elaborate spectacles to misdirect, confuse and neutralize every demographic. Eg: create philosophies for the academic types, create sports for the dude-bro types, create activist-causes for the concerned types, etc.
3. Create a culture around those spectacles.
4. Pretend that culture is organic (or co-opted by anyone unsavory).
5. Carry out whatever plan, which has real consequences, while...
6. the populace endlessly debates the culture of the spectacle.
But it isn't so serious. It's just a hunch I have, based on the information I have come across.

[Anonymous No.21515505]

>>21515473
I don't have a philosophy degree, I study it as a side hobby. And even that way I manage to grasp at least a small bit of it, something that you clearly cannot.

[Anonymous No.21515511]

>NOOOOO DONT HELP YOURSELF
>YOU MUST NOT LIFT YOURSELF UP FROM THE GUTTER
>YOU MUST REMAIN AN UNTERNENSCH CHRISTIAN CATTLE

[Anonymous No.21515534]

>>21515498
You are observing human nature but you are arriving at a false conclusion.
The things you mentioned dont need a conspiracy to arrive to that, It's just that humans will eventually corrupt everything they touch. All things start off great

[Anonymous No.21515563]

>>21515534
>you are arriving at a false conclusion
Wrong. I said my claim was a hunch, while you conclusively state that I am wrong. There is no way for us to know which is which. None of us operate at that level of power or have the information to conclusively verify our theories. But notice again how you:
1. attribute to human nature and the natural course of history, what could very well have some significant part by (malicious) design by some group of people.
2. immediately repeat the culturally correct answer among academics/philosophy-types: humans are bad, we destroy everything, etc.
Now you see what I mean?
Of course, I still maintain that my claim is a hunch, as I don't/can't have the information to verify it.

[Anonymous No.21515572]

>>21515304
I refuse to agree with anything this deranged maniac has written.
He did create the most massive scam in the history of the world, which is in itself quite funny, but my affection for him stops there.

[Anonymous No.21515600]

>>21515572
I agree with you. 99% of Freud's work is hot garbage. The psychiatric profession, therapy, etc. is definitely a scam. However, the remaining 1% is in my opinion still useful, as long as one doesn't get carried away by total self-directed introspection and sex-obsessed wordplay.

[Anonymous No.21515602]

This is the pleb understanding of philosophy wherein their conception of what philosophy is is restricted to *moral philosophy*. I am…le Ubermensch!…I am…le Stoic! Shit like metaphysics and ontology has basically no clear relationship with questions of how to fix your personal problems

[Anonymous No.21515605]

>>21515602
This would be the small part of philosophy that isn't prescriptive. I believe such philosophies are exhausted and are now parodies of themselves, in the form of totally baseless metaphysics. Such philosphies are now sophisticated word games.

[Anonymous No.21515606]

>>21515602
>look at me what i do is pointless intellectual masturbation that makes me not pleb

[Anonymous No.21515611]

>>21515563
Yeah well your claim is almost unfalsifiable. You're basically saying that there's a small group of people is pulling the strings behind all these incredibly diverse domains (sports, philosophy, activism) acting in a malicious way. Im saying that there are people in general acting in malicious way and that's how things get corrupted. I am by no means a deboonker but its makes much more sense that, for example, the academic type is corrupting his field because he wants a cushy tenure than what you're proposing. We can witness this in real time in basically all things. You're playing basketball with your friends and someone is fucking it up for the team because he wants to be the star of the show

[Anonymous No.21515617]

>>21515473
Please explain what philosphy of mind, metaphysics, or even ontology has to do with self help? Because outside of moral philosophy no philosopher talks about how you should live your life. Because from what you have written you seem like a retard that thinks stoicism is serious philosphy.

[Anonymous No.21515649]

>>21515611
>Yeah well your claim is almost unfalsifiable
And so is yours. "Its just the natural course of things" "Its just human nature" "obviously" "how could you think there are a few people pulling strings lol". How could you verify these things? I repeat myself, its a hunch. Not a conclusively verified fact. Same as you. But your claim is the neutral culturally appropriate one.
>the academic type is corrupting his field because he wants a cushy tenure
This defnitely exists. Not denying that. My claim states that the overarching culture, which is designed to misdirect and/or call to action is created and put into effect by those in power. This trickles down into the diverse and various forms, through indivial human behavior that we can directly observe, like the examples you gave. But the overarching actions and misdirections away from the schemes of those in power remain.
I understand that my claim is "crazy" and "schizophrenic". Try to look at it from my perspective. Obviously the culture and reach of those in power is not totalizing and complete. But it isn't insignificant either, which is what most in academic/philosophy/political circles believe (or would like to believe). Their reach and influence is rarely ever discussed, usually deemed too insignificant, and immediately misdirected into "its human nature" or "its just things played out" or "its this vague category of people called capitalists or the bourgeouis" or ... My only point is that their reach and influence is far more, much more than we would like to admit or believe.
An appropriate analogy would be a corporation. The executives set the rules, work, money making schemes, reward and punishment rules, etc into motion. Everyone who joins under them is following the same script, with their own personal variation and their own individual lives and scenarios. The executives don't have complete and total control, obviously. But they don't have insignificant control either.

[Anonymous No.21515653]

>>21515606
It kinda does. The plebeian-bourgeois ethos just attempts to extract material value from philosophy. It’s a completely profane attitude towards reality, maybe the hylic spammer will back me up on this. Dude how is this gonna help me get pussy? How is if gonna help me get a promotion? Pretty gay if you ask me

[Anonymous No.21515667]

>>21515649
contd...
My point is that all these philosophies and their writers, which we in good faith think have organic and natural origins, which we in good faith assume don't hide vested interests and hidden agendas, which we in good faith consider as bodies of philosophies in a vaccuum, which we in good faith instantly state that they were co-opted by bad actors, have had a vested interests and a real hidden agenda from the get go. It is one way to influence the populace. Perhaps the agenda isn't a complete a nd totalizing one, and perhaps the hidden motive isn't some grand scheme all the time, but it is definitely there in a more realistic scale.

[Anonymous No.21515680]

>>21515653
>Dude how is this gonna help me get pussy? How is if gonna help me get a promotion?
clearly you're well versed in moral philosophy and ethics if this is your takeaway of their core issues

[Anonymous No.21515688]

>>21515336
So true! Most people don’t understand that.

[Anonymous No.21515716]

>>21515667
Lurker here. You are making a good case here, without going over the board a looking really schizo. I like your exchange with anon in general, curious stuff.

[Anonymous No.21515723]

>>21515680
I’m not saying those are the core issues of the works. I’m saying that that seems to be what people who complain about the uselessness of philosophy seem to want

[Anonymous No.21515730]

>>21515473

t.filtered

[Anonymous No.21515735]

>>21515723
It's all related to occultism and personal issues. If you don't care, if you just want a puzzle, go play some chess or Go. Pretending that it's not serious is NPC. And it's all about morals too, since everything to do with value as opposed to fact is intrinsically connected with morality.

[Anonymous No.21515801]

>>21515304
Jew

[Anonymous No.21515808]

>>21515304
>quotes Freud
>despises rigorous thought
Does Freud write anything about being very predictable?

[Anonymous No.21515823]

>>21515242
>accomplished nothing
Yeah, goy, unless you are a consooomer who has 10 houses 20 cars and are getting divorced raped by 5 roasties, you haven't made it.

[Anonymous No.21516366]

>>21515242
It's self help for us off the charts IQers.

[Anonymous No.21516391]

>>21515242
You are focusing too much on lebensphilosophie and existentialism
Philosophy helps justify and explain new ways of acting in the world. S
Some daily argunebts used to convince poeple were once thought by philosophers
Everyone is a philosphers as every person in the world must face the same questions to live a normal life

[Anonymous No.21516401]

>>21516391
>to live a normal life
Consoom?

[Anonymous No.21516408]

>>21516401
This too but mainly not going insane, working and being able to form bonds with other people.

[Anonymous No.21516425]

>>21516408
The world has never been this crazy though.

[Anonymous No.21516480]

>>21516425
and it was never this philosophically dead either, most of everything we're supposed to think/believe is arbitrary, science/government said so and that's it, at least in Catholic times it was arbitrary but static, now it's also dynamic and you could be saying something that will get you in trouble 5 years from now.

[Anonymous No.21516522]

>>21516480
I think it's going to get worse too. I feel a need to be extremely mentally strong because it can be felt that there is something coming.

[Anonymous No.21516571]

>>21515572
>I refuse to argue with anything that [___] said.
Spoke like a true seeker of truth.
>>21515600
He said it himself, assuming you are quoting him. Being a generalization machine he, hopefully he considered that he could be the exact type he referring to.
>Most philosphies are prescriptive, but they are the writer's attempt at solving their own neurosis. Any real insight is merely incidental.

[Anonymous No.21517230]

>>21516425
You mean the general picture of number of people with mental illnesses?
If you mean the general.picture, i disagree
If you mean number of crazy people, i would have to gogle it

[Anonymous No.21517697]

>>21515242
No it's not you dumb nigger. You didn't read.

[Anonymous No.21517793]

how are metaphysics or epistemology self help lol
I dont think you have ever read philosophy

[Anonymous No.21517797]

>>21515304
Freud stole everything from Nietzsche and made it shitty
That same type of "diagnosis" is made by N all the time kek

[Anonymous No.21517812]

>>21515572
CBT still uses a bunch of stuff that Freud was the first to formulate
go suck your own dunning kruger micro dick

[Anonymous No.21517821]

>>21515605
>in the form of totally baseless metaphysics.
wdymbt?
>Such philosphies are now sophisticated word games.
you could say the same about anything
literally 0 real insight

[I V R I • N E M O !!GgBWHLRiayD No.21517910]

>>21515242


It seems like that to you on a superficial level, because much of life constitutes an interplay between forces, fulcrums, and levers, and because you are an imbecile who conflates philosophy with sophistry.

The optimal philosopher goes through the same things as any other optimal person goes through, except that he also happens to think more & better on the metaphysical level, which serves as a "doubleedged sword" in the world; this qualitytype of philosopher tends toward the Roman attitude in general, and toward the Catholic one in particular, because, just as aptitude acuminates optittude, so he recognizes that God employs the plenary in His service.

[I V R I • N E M O !!GgBWHLRiayD No.21517924]

>>21517910
>The optimal philosopher goes through the same things [that] any other optimal person goes through [...]

[Anonymous No.21517993]

to me nietzsche often feels like more than just a philosopher. its like he was trying to understand our morals by going back historically and finding them at the root. its like hes excavating the past

[Anonymous No.21518003]

>>21515304
>>21515667

Not the person you're responding to but I've enjoyed the back and forth so far and would like to see it continue.

I'd like to go back to your original post: I'm partial to Freud's analysis over your own hunch because the former is more helpful than your own. Here's what I mean.

Take an individual, let's call him John, and let's suppose John sets out to write a philosophies text. With Freud's analysis, we can learn that John's text is going to deal with his own neurosis, explicitly or otherwise. This is helpful to not only John but the reader who may suffer from the neurosis as him.

Your hunch has a subtle way of making John's neurosis insignificant by positing that it's a result of people who were in control hundreds or even thousands of years ago. Even if it was true, what do you suggest be done about it and his neurosis? I hope it amounts more to just 'wake up'.

Democritus imagined the world is filled with atoms before we had the tools to prove it. What real change would you posit he was hiding? Ditto for Hume, Confucius, Buddha, Aquinas, Spinoza, etc. Since your hunch is unfalsifiable I'm not here too say "you're wrong and here m here's why" but I'm asking what are the ramifications of your conclusions and how are they fruitful.

[Anonymous No.21519031]

>>21515242
I wish people knew how juvenile they look with their melodramatic reviews of philosophy

It's never "I don't prefer this guy" it's alway "this is the dumbest thing literally ever and it's for little babies, which I'm not, I'm a big boy no cap"

[Anonymous No.21519360]

>philosopher
>literally an incel
every fucking time

[Anonymous No.21520588]

>>21515304
>the writer's attempt at solving their own neurosis
every genius in humankind ever

[Anonymous No.21521373]

>>21517910
lol, all philosophy is faggotry mixed with thinly vailed occultism. Just men deceiving themselves, vainly exalting themselves. Look at the way you lash out when someone jabs at your sacred cow. You embody that overly emotional beast which witlessly analysis the vain imaginings of its own heart instead of the real facts of life which would expose it, the selfsame beast we call philosopher. lmao.
I'd have more respect for an open sophist than a philosopher. It's mostly just literal rebranded kabbalah all the way down though, if I'm honest, lol.

[Anonymous No.21521491]

Philosophy taught me about virtue and how to live a noble life. Socrates taught me how to get others to be on my side. Nietzsche, kierkegaard, and more helped me get in touch with my soul. These things have been invaluable to me.

[Anonymous No.21522924]

>>21518003
You misunderstand my claim. In short: most philosophies are written with an ulterior motive to capture thoughts and engineer people. For example: Marxism was written to misdirect the masses from the real power changes that were planned and happening at the time. All the emotionally charged observations written in incisive language are merely a means to draw the target audience in. This is why I despise most philosphy. I see the underlying intentions, the vested interests and get put off.
>>21521491
You should understand that others experienced the same feeling of structure and noble purpose through other pursuits, espicially if they never had structure in their lives before. Lifting weights did the same for many, as did career ambitions, religion, technical sciences, arts and crafts, speaking to an elder, riding motorcycles, drug use, love, sports, familial duty, extreme hardship, violence... you get the idea. All those things broke people too, just like philosphy makes many introspective cloistered morons totally detached from reality.
Philosphy helps, but lets not pretend it is the be all, end all.

[Anonymous No.21522929]

>>21515242
Sometimes I get the feeling that secular philosophy is just a form of mental masturbation

[Anonymous No.21522934]

>>21522929
Sometimes I get the feeling that theology is a more sophisticated form of mental masturbation.

[Anonymous No.21522976]

Congrats everyone ITT! You just successfully swallowed OP's bait whole!

[Anonymous No.21523109]

>>21515649
>"Woah ... What if like people with more power had more power than other people
Woah

[Anonymous No.21523121]

>>21521373
>witlessly analysis the vain imaginings of its own heart instead of the real facts of life
What are these real facts, faggot?
And why should I prefer them to my own schizo fantasies?

[Anonymous No.21523135]

>>21515242
Sometimes nothing keeps me warmer, more safe. Philosophy is just the greatest, especially for a godless person like me. Call it cope all you want.

[Anonymous No.21523140]

>>21522924
>Marxism was written to misdirect the masses from the real power changes that were planned and happening at the time.
This is such laughably juvenile analysis.
Look I don't even like Marx, but this is ridiculously vague. What are the specific societal changes Marx ignores, and what makes you think he intentionally ignores these societal trends. Name the secret motive here, be specific.

[Anonymous No.21523180]

>>21523140
>This is such laughably juvenile analysis.
And yours is a hopelessly trite response to any suspicion of slight malicious intent. "Schizzoooo" "juvinile" "antisemite"...
Marxism was created after much discussion with rabbis. It was seen as the new version of tikkum olam, since the the masses were wary of the older versions, namely chivalry, nationalism and religion.
It was designed to hide the usurping of power by jewish industrialists. They overtook tsarist russia while convincing the populace that the suffering they were experiencing was the latest iteration of the marxist dialectic, and thereby a good thing.
Marxism also misdirects real complaints and conditions of workers to vague discussions about vague categories like "capitalists" and "bourgeois", with more vague gnostic and hermetic nonsense.
most will say marxism was co-opted by those bad actors. i say this was marxisms intent all along.
but the instant i say this people lose their minds and scream "juvilile!!!" "schizo" "anti-semite" blah blah blah
if i say a corporations executives had an ulterior motive behind something they enacted, everyone responds " yes makes sense". but if i say most philosphies had some ulterior motive, possibly to engineer people, you scream.
i believe you are the prime example of the culturally appropriate academic type. any mention of malicious intent is met with "oh wow you're so vague and dumb".
whatever. stay mad.

[Anonymous No.21523184]

>>21523180
and finally if you think im making up all the things i have mentioned, please look into actual history, how the philosophies were created, the people who wrote them, the bloodlines and connections.
but im sure you will ignore the entire conversation i had with the other anon and give another canned response.

[Anonymous No.21523332]

>>21523180
>Marxism was created after much discussion with rabbis.
Marx actually criticized Judaism (despite being Jewish himself). Believing it to be a hindrance to development and progress, as it encouraged tribal ties that misdirected people away from developing a unified worker-consciousness (or something to that effect).
Again, it's clear you haven't engaged with any of the thinkers or authors you are referencing.
>since the the masses were wary of the older versions, namely chivalry, nationalism and religion.
One, nationalism is itself modern (though it has long developing roots from the renaissance forward). Two, the masses were not opposed to nationalism in Marx's time, this was the age of nationalism.
I also find it funny that you list these three different categories as overlapping. In the history of the European continent it was often the case that the number one religious institution, the Catholic Church, was opposed to the growing power of secular nation-states threatened its own power. So grouping together nationalism with religion doesn't necessarily make sense.
>Marxism also misdirects real complaints and conditions of workers to vague discussions about vague categories like "capitalists" and "bourgeois", with more vague gnostic and hermetic nonsense.
I will agree with you on this point. I'm not a Marxist, and find the division simplistic as he formulates it.