>>24842370
I can understand Schoppys nihilism, but why didn't he kill himself then.
At least with Nietz you get a sense of rebellion.

>>24842468
>I can understand Schoppy
No you don't. SchopGod literally tells you how to live a fulfiling life in his later works. Lay off tiktok philosophy, chudcel.

>>24842468
>I can understand Schoppys nihilism, but why didn't he kill himself then.
You didn’t understand Schopenhauer if your only response is the most unimaginative, tired one you could’ve trotted out.

>>24842468
Rebellion is a gesture made by women when they demand greater domination over them.

He is a mystic of the self against everything and everyone. A theologian who only conceives reason identified with God, in such a way that if God dies, reason dies with him, thus depriving mankind of any possibility of being a rational being (Die fröhliche Wissenschaft, 1882) Nietzsche condemns the world of reason in the same way that an Old Testament god eternally punishes the human being who accesses knowledge. Nietzsche does not want man to use reason. In fact, he does not conceive of it as a rational animal, but simply as an animal. Nietzsche claims in his writings the destruction or deconstruction of our rational world, so that in his place only insanity, unreason and the most violent passions inhabit, without any limit. Nietzsche does not want a civilized world: he wants an animal and mystical world, where the human being is a dreamlike and unconscious beast. This is the myth of the superman. Dreams, imaginations, and tricks attain the same status of reality as waking events, scientific truths, or philosophical axioms. With Nietzsche, the irrational psychologism and the autism of the conscience ready to deny all the evidences rush towards the fatal peak of a crazy orgasm. Only with Nietzsche in mind can one have the shamelessness to assert the existence of interpretations whose causal and consequent facts have never existed. There is no room for greater idealism. To affirm that there are no facts, but only interpretations, is equivalent to affirming with all brazenness that one does not have the slightest idea of the facts that are said to be interpreting.

As a lover of poodles I need to read him
>Since compassion for animals is so intimately associated with goodness of character, it may be confidently asserted that whoever is cruel to animals cannot be a good man
Based

>>24842370
To an extent I agree but add phenomenology and post-structuralism to the accepted canon.

>>24842370
schopenhauer gave the world hitler lol

>>24842370
>compassion
>misanthropic
?

>>24842481
But anon, Book IV in his World as Will is just him going in circles about how his whole system can never be refuted and how he tries to play tricks on it yet he's aware even Asceticism can do nothing

>>24843727
Phenemology is baseless
Post structuralism is somehow immanent
Also Camus's absurdism
And Kierkegaard's leap of faith

>>24844413
Baseless according to whom? I'd say post-structuralism attempts to obscure what phenomenology reveals

Im reading the world as will and representation right now and it is blowing my feeble little mind

>>24842370
>compassion
>misanthropic
Pick

>>24843751
based

>>24843751
My two beautiful heroes

Schopy gave us Hitler (who nearly eradicated the evil from Earth)
Hegel (the faggot) gave us Karl Marx (Stupid reactionary retards who are onto nothing)

>>24846545
The best advertisement Hegel has ever gotten.

>>24846545
Wow watch with that epic antisemitism edge there. Also Hegel and Marx are based beyond belief. It's not their fault that your IQ is too low to understand them but then again you are probably stupid enough to think that Marx's thought starts and ends with the communist manifesto

>>24846629
Holy fuck, I'm actually really surprised, No really unironically I'm actually very astonished and I even commend you for actually defending Marx's idealism and Hegel's writing.

It really takes a very dumb individual to even just state such things but for you you even went the long way to defend them, I really salute your dumbfounded unintelligent beliefs.

>>24846629
>>24846862
Can you retards actually make a point and substantiate your claims instead of trading 'nuh uh my daddy is smarter than yours!'. Really tired of this shit.

>>24842370
Correct simply because the only two disciplines that are relevant are aesthetics and ethics, which already peaked before or with Schopenhauer.

>>24843751
and it was nietzsche's neurotic attempts at rejecting schopenhauer that led to hitler being possessed by wotan jung talks about this

>>24846946
And this >>24847004 exactly the problem

File: Diogenes_brings_a_plucked(...).jpg (39 KB, 539x507)

39 KB JPG

>>24846629

A human is an ape that happens to have accessed language. Marx didn't understand that, didn't make any attempt to consider the animal portion of the human condition, and it's why his claims to a science are false. Of course, neither has any other thinker sincerely made an attempt to face that reality, except for maybe Diogenes, if the stories aren't apocraphyl, and so everyone else is just ego stroke wanking as well, Marxists or capitalists. From Aristotle to Żiżek. What we need is a new pragmatism that addresses this reality, rather than attempting to manipulate semantics, the immaterial existence of language. A third pragmatism... an... an animal pragmatism! (Animal pragmatism™ patent pending. Don't none of you thieving niggers try and steal it)

>>24847026
Too late. Posting on substack

>>24847026
The issue with addressing the animal nature of our condition is that it leads to eugenics arguments very fast. Addressing our animal nature means addressing our physical form and what's ideal and desirable.

>>24847026
We're all just monkeys on a flying rock? And you came up with this yourself? Someone get this guy a book deal

>>24843787
Somewhere he says something like “when you consider the things people do you will hate them, and when you consider the things people suffer you will pity them, so we must alternate between both views in order to have a proper attitude towards other people”

>>24847004
>jung talks about this
Where? You've piqued my interest.

>>24847026
My nigga, Schopenhauer writes extensively about humans being overwhelmingly dominated by their animal nature. See WWR Vol 2, Cambridge translation, “On the Primacy of the Will.” One of the best chapters he ever wrote and one of the greatest pieces of writing in history, period

>>24843787
>>24844494
Those two words aren't even remotely incompatible. If anything, they're connected. Misanthropy, strictly speaking, usually stems from distrust, disappointment or disdain toward humankind as a collective. It isn't necessarily rooted in hatred per se, but in disillusionment; a reaction to the cruelty, stupidity and hypocrisy of society. Compassion is just an emotional and moral response to suffering, and it isn't limited to humanity but to all life. In fact, it's easy to become misanthropic precisely when you view humanity without a biased lens.

>>24847106
>It isn't necessarily rooted in hatred per se, but in disillusionment
I would argue disillusionment comes from the result of naive or idealistic notions of what one sees and could be in respect to humanity and human nature. I get what youre saying but to take the literal definition of misanthropy 'hatred of mankind' and compassion. Can you see the general contradiction one could interpret?
I get your broad point
I do get angry and frustrated at humanity, but I wouldn’t call myself misanthropic. That’s when unprocessed disillusionment calcifies into outright hatred of mankind, and compassion loses its discernment (a requirement) and becoming selective rather than 'universal'. I dont mean this in a religious sense but grace and mercy are pretty important traits one should develop.

Am i making it clear or not? Essentially one should acknowledge human failure (myself included) without succumbing to contempt, although its not easy but it is doable

>>24847026
Read World as Will

>>24847148
I see what you mean, and I agree there are levels to it; not every frustration leads to contempt. But I wouldn't say misanthropy necessarily stems from naïve or idealistic notions that got shattered. Humanity itself places a gargantuan worth on its own existence and accomplishments, seeing itself as the measure of all things. In that light, I see misanthropy as simply tipping the scale back and restoring some proportion after centuries of self-worship. That said, I don't disagree that people can go overboard, and that's not productive either.

File: come_on_now.png (129 KB, 500x522)

129 KB PNG

>>24842370
>psychology not included

>>24847094
not that anon, but it's an essay from volume 10 of his collected works

here's the essay in full: https://www.philosopher.eu/others-writings/essay-on-wotan-w-nietzsche-c-g-jung/

>>24842370
>great comment on indian philosophy
hello rajnesh

>>24848156
Thanks

>>24847004
Neetch has done more bad in the world than any other philosopher

>>24842468
>I can understand Schoppys nihilism
No you can’t, you literally understand nothing about Schopenhauer. He has a very detailed ethics where he argues specifically against suicide.

> In the evening a letter from Prof. Nietzsche, which pleases us, for his mood had given us cause for concern. Regarding this, R. says he fears that Schopenhauer's philosophy might in the long run be a bad influence on young people of this sort, because they apply his pessimism, which is a form of thinking, contemplation, to life itself, and derive from it an active form of hopelessness.
t. Cosima