Tfw

...

Other urls found in this thread:

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:20th-century_philosophers
linguafranca.mirror.theinfo.org/9810/ip.html
jacobinmag.com/2011/07/the-power-of-nonsense/)
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

When did Wittgenstein become a Nazi?

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:20th-century_philosophers

rekt

Wittgenstein was bff with Hitler and Himmler in school.

lol

And Wittgenstein made Hitler into an antisemite

linguafranca.mirror.theinfo.org/9810/ip.html

So in a way, Wittgenstein was the ultimate nazi.

Sartre was not a nazi

Sartre was not a philosopher

Cucktinental philosophy is really useless circlejerking.

wew

t.muke

I never implied that but I'm pretty sure he was an actual cuck

How was he an actual cuck?

he advocated a form of cuckoldry, not that he was necessarily wrong in doing that tho

Every single existentialist with exception of kiekegaard, neitzsche and dostoyevsky.

Every western marxist.

Every phenomenologist.

Every post-/structuralist.

Calm down, we won't talk to you or your wife's son ever again.

???

Circle-jerk sophism that is leftist 'theory' does not equal philosophy.

Not philosophy.

Mostly not philosophy

Just retarded. Definitely not philosophy.

Thats Your Opinion

Pretty much user, you got that right.

And the only good philosopher of the 21st century is a Kraut hippy new-realist.

oh how could I forget that Foucault and Derrida are still good. How selfish and stupid of me.

I admire your list, but I think you're wrong on a couple points.

1. Heidegger is a fine existentialist
2. Merleau-Ponty is quite good.
3. Derrida is quite nice.

BTFO. HOW WILL user EVER RECOVER

...

no one besides a bunch of new left baby boomers consider him 'the only real philosopher of the 20th century'

FYI, while Heidegger was a member of the Nazi Party, he fell out of favor with them because his philosophy didn't really push their agenda. He also later expressed regret at having joined them in the first place, if I remember correctly. But at the time, Heidegger wasn't wholly against the Nazi Party on principle, and it's hard to say exactly what his relationship was with Nazism. It's a difficult question to answer, as Heidegger was a complex person.

At the very least, it's pretty clear he was some sort of national "socialist" - something like a [email protected]/* */, maybe? He didn't seem to care for the racialist pseudo-biology bullshit coming from the Nazis, but he did hope for some sort of resurgence of German culture and the Volk and saw the Nazi Party at the time as the best hope for this.

Not that this really matters to me. I still think Heidegger's metaphysics is extremely valuable and also influential, making it in its own right worth studying for understanding other 20th century thinkers. Though there are plenty of good ones besides him.

There's a great political value in reading Foucault and Baudrillard, but I don't see how this could be the case with Derrida who is quite enjoyable to read (for a while) but has no value outside of that.

Something tells me you haven't actually read either of them, or given their thought a chance yourself.

In fact, something tells me you haven't read much of anything. I get the sense you've maybe read 5 books of philosophy in your life but for some reason think you're already an expert and know everything relevant there is to know.

You seem to outright dismiss entirely everything written by someone you view as the enemies of the three pet philosophers you've decided to devote yourself to.

WEW

If it doesn't matter to you, why are you regurgitating the general apologist line?

I know about that one, same as claiming Marx was a capitalist because he analyzed capitalism, and same as claiming Žižek is a liberal because he wrote some watered down articles for mainstream newspapers.
Read Foucault himself instead of Jacobin smear campaigns, or is Žižek a fascist as well because Jacobin told you so? (jacobinmag.com/2011/07/the-power-of-nonsense/)
Read his The Birth of Biopower, it's a genealogy and a critique of neoliberalism before the notion of neoliberalism even entered the public discourse. Don't shoot the messenger.

...

I like Heidegger but he was a spooked cunt at the same time

You're doing the damage control. You haven't yet touched on anything Foucault wrote. Might be time to actually read him, no? I recommend his lectures on neoliberalism that I've mentioned above. Contains a nice criticism of the "phobia of the state" that he saw developing among leftists in the 70s, he was warning in those lectures that those leftists are only helping neoliberal ideology.

Because I don't think the question in the first place is as simple as "he was a Nazi".

He was a member of the Nazi Party, and not super enthusiatic about it, but he seemed to nonetheless hold some nationalist views. That's not really an apologist line. Just a more honest answer to the question.

So, is there anything of value here or are you just stroking your dick over how smart you are?

Name me one thing I have dismissed instead of reading and criticising before dropping.

Oh shit wait, you fucking can't. Are you THIS salty just because Heidegger BTFO Marx so hard?

Ironically this leftcom poster is *the* embodiment of Heidegger's criticism of Marxism. He's unwittingly proving him right, so I suppose we have him to thank.

I'm not really aware of what Heidegger's criticism of Marxism was. All I know is that he wasn't a fan of it.

Incorrect. He was very enthusiastic about it and was a dedicated antisemite until he died.

Pos-structuralism is mostly homosexuals. Homos cannot be philosophers by definition, since wisdom is a woman and only loves heterosexual men. Also homosexuality is a disease caused by occlusion of the muhadara chakra, and wisdom comes from the higher chakra, so a homosexual cannot possess wisdom.

Litteraly not an argument as our current conception of homosexuality is up for wide philosophical debate with the recent trap phenomenon. We can only know after this essential question is awnserd, wich will result into a new era of philosophy that will go post-post modernism.

No true scotsman
Philosopher is a somewhat meaningless term in the first place since people can't seem to agree what it means but let's just say that a philosopher is someone that takes interest in the topics that are usually called philosophy.
I am a philosopher, you might be one, a lot of people on this board are in some form. How are we any less real than the person you are on about?

Shitty bait thread tbh

You don't. Heidegger was a Nazi, no ifs and buts. His philosophy IS NAZI PHILOSOPHY, no ifs and buts. There is nothing subtle or complex or indirect or critical about his relationship with nazism. Do you even his black diaries? I admit there is that petit-bourg-special-snowflake-cant-into-science-but-want-to-be-an-intellectual-anyway-romantic-semi-primitivist-pomo-asshat appeal to him, so I can see why he remains in high esteem among philosophy students.

False. Shut the fuck up, you stupid cunt.

A philosopher must love wisdom. Leftists cannot be philosophers, by definition, since they do not care about wisdom, only their mental ideological constructs.

ftfy

I just wanna say that both of these posts add nothing of value to the conversation. I hate Nazis just as much any other anarchist, but dismissing the entirety of Heidegger's philosophy on some bullshit "B-BUT HE WAS A MEMBER OF THE NAZI PARTY THEREFORE HE WAS A FULL-BLOWN JEW-HATING SIEG-HEILING STORMCUCK" is not only historically inaccurate, but also doesn't demonstrate any engagements iwth his ideas.

But it's not. He wasn't Adolf Hitler's most devoted fanatic but, on the other hand, he wasn't an innocent simply caught up in the historical moment. He strikes me as an opportunist who, while not a full-blown believer in Nazism, is still very sympathetic to the overarching politics of the Nazis.

Tough. It's Holla Forums, not /philosophy/. I could make a thread about Carl Schmidt here, but "he was a Nazi" would be a valid objection to such a thread since this isn't a general philosophy/law board. The topic would need to have some relevance to the left.

"Let not propositions and 'ideas' be the rules of your being. The Führer alone is the present and future German reality and its law. Learn to know ever more deeply: that from now on every single thing demands decision, and every action responsibility. Heil Hitler!"
Wisdom for the ages, eh? Gee, why would the leftypol mob call that guy a Nazi?

Martin "only individuals are creative (even to lead), the crowd never" Heidegger was a Nazi, not in the sense that he was forced into it like the former pope, not in the sense of opportunism or lack of heroism, but in the sense that he was a proponent of Nazi thought. Read his diaries and you will see. How could his world view be separated from being a Nazi? At best, you could cut out some parts like his obscurantist anti-science bs and say

sartre>heidegger
that's just objectively true

...

We already have post-post-modernism though. Honestly getting tired of hearing the word modern when it's not used in the Hegelian sense.

Beautiful