Fuck you, I liked both.
should you not?
>As a disciple of Schopenhauer, Bahnsen dared a merger of Hegel's dialectic (which Bahnsen, however, accepted only within the realms of the abstract) and Schopenhauer's monism. Though in this connection the reasonless, all-embracing Schopenhauerian will is still accepted as the essence of the world and the only thing real, it doesn't regard the will as being the same within all individuals, but as just as manifold as these individuals. >https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julius_Bahnsen
>>25347875not bad
>>25347853/lit/ equivalent of coprophilia
>>25347875If you liked Bahnsen then you might like Von Hartmann. He was another Schope/Hegel synthesizer and he also included Leibnitz. He responded to a large number of German thinkers but most of that didn't age well. He thought neither will nor reason could act alone, neither could subordinate the other, and neither is the origination of the other. He also thought it was the worst possible world of worlds. At some point the individual wishes to retain time so the reason gradually becomes more powerful but the amount of suffering this causes grows in proportion. He conjectured at some point it wasn't possible to lose time authentically and it was also impossible to negate the will to live individually. The person has to negate the will to live through collective action. If the philosophy holds as a universal then everyone has to cooperate and evolve the collective in order to negate the suffering of each individual. >it didn't pan out but it's an interesting experimental philosophy
>>25347853>>25347875These people would be the most fanatical mohamedians if born just a few thousand kilonmetres southeast
>>25347875>>25348036what was it with germans and being philosophically retarded post-Hegel>dude, it's like, the World is le bad and I call it evil and it like sucks, maan! da will bruh!>God is a decaying corpse bruh!>capitalism is... le bad, dude!>motion and rest are a dialectical contradiction bruh!
>>25348380it's still going btw
>>25348380>filtered by chad germs. lolololol kys
I like Stirner who was a post-Hegelian, & like Schopenhauer. But I do not like Hegel himself. What does that make me?
>>25347853You liked both Schopenhauer's rants on Hegel and Hegel? I guess anything is possible if you like Hegel.
>>25348548>evola/Mann crossover?The stirntroon, born a fag, enters the ranks of heterosexual society only to realize he would rather be in the company of that which he was born. Destined to suffer the intensity of homoerotic twink love.>there's an evola outbreak, sorry, ebola outbreak.
>>25347853don't you know that you have to 100% agree with an author if you read and enjoy his work?
I absorbed Hegel through Instagram reels
>>25348536Finally someone recognizes the superiority of the Germanic race on here. The only foreign languages i would actually want to learn.
>>25348536>chad germsbooktok is that way zoomer retard
>>25348645How do you know all this about me?
>>25350927This board worships frogs too much. Sorry, but I find his attitude refreshing
Imagine still thinking in terms of unified subjects or monolithic 'Wills' in 2026. The real synthesis isn't merging Hegel and Schopenhauer; it's recognizing that the world is a flattened network of autonomous, conflicting structures. The Will isn't one big cosmic mistake—it's fragmented into a million localized, material subsystems that don't give a shit about human logic or human suffering. It’s nominalism all the way down. You're all arguing about whether the cosmic machine is rational or broken, when the reality is just an ungrounded assembly of parts grinding against each other in the dark.
