d2jsp
Log InRegister
d2jsp Forums > Off-Topic > General Chat > Political & Religious Debate > Soren Kierkegaard
Prev1345
Add Reply New Topic New Poll
Member
Posts: 40,833
Joined: Sep 17 2011
Gold: 0.00
Jun 28 2015 01:34pm
Quote (Gastly @ 28 Jun 2015 17:09)
Kierkegaard is one of the greatest philosophers to have ever lived


Lol...

'life is shit, stop enjoying it and realise you're going to die horribly and all your pursuits will end in anguish' - Kirkegaard

If that's the pinnacle of philosophy I'm fucking glad I'm studying actual sciences.

We're talking about a man whose brilliant thinking caused him to break off a marriage with the love of his life because he didn't believe love and marriage could co-exist. Poor fucker... Self fulfilling prophecy all the way. He thought life was pain so he created a life of pain for himself.

The guy is a cautionary tale.

This post was edited by Scaly on Jun 28 2015 01:37pm
Member
Posts: 57,901
Joined: Dec 3 2008
Gold: 285.00
Jun 28 2015 01:55pm
Quote (Scaly @ Jun 28 2015 02:34pm)
Lol...

'life is shit, stop enjoying it and realise you're going to die horribly and all your pursuits will end in anguish' - Kirkegaard

If that's the pinnacle of philosophy I'm fucking glad I'm studying actual sciences.

We're talking about a man whose brilliant thinking caused him to break off a marriage with the love of his life because he didn't believe love and marriage could co-exist. Poor fucker... Self fulfilling prophecy all the way. He thought life was pain so he created a life of pain for himself.

The guy is a cautionary tale.


Not as much of a cautionary tale as Socrates. His neighbors literally made him kill himself.

And while "actual" sciences are good for describing what Is, philosophy is for what Ought to be. Prescriptive rather than descriptive. It is different. I suppose you could say "I'm fucking glad I play baseball a lot" and it would have the same meaning more or less.

This post was edited by Skinned on Jun 28 2015 01:58pm
Member
Posts: 4,783
Joined: Jul 6 2012
Gold: 68.99
Warn: 10%
Jun 28 2015 01:57pm
Quote (Scaly @ Jun 28 2015 10:34pm)
'life is shit, stop enjoying it and realise you're going to die horribly and all your pursuits will end in anguish' - Kirkegaard

If that's the pinnacle of philosophy

luckily, the outbursts that your eternal anal phase causes aren't the pinnacle of philosophy.

Quote (Skinned @ Jun 28 2015 10:55pm)
Not as much of a cautionary tale as Socrates. His neighbors literally made him kill himself.

i can really understand why. the guy'd be god damn annoying in the Socratic Dialogues even if he didn't constantly bring up how much he adores little boys

This post was edited by Gastly on Jun 28 2015 01:58pm
Member
Posts: 57,901
Joined: Dec 3 2008
Gold: 285.00
Jun 28 2015 01:58pm
Quote (Gastly @ Jun 28 2015 02:57pm)
luckily, the outbursts that your eternal anal phase causes aren't the pinnacle of philosophy.


i can really understand why. the guy's god damn annoying in the Socratic Dialogues


His Apology is hilarious.
Member
Posts: 40,833
Joined: Sep 17 2011
Gold: 0.00
Jun 28 2015 02:07pm
Quote (Gastly @ 28 Jun 2015 19:57)
luckily, the outbursts that your eternal anal phase causes aren't the pinnacle of philosophy.


Not worth my time.

Quote (Skinned @ 28 Jun 2015 19:55)
Not as much of a cautionary tale as Socrates. His neighbors literally made him kill himself.

And while "actual" sciences are good for describing what Is, philosophy is for what Ought to be. Prescriptive rather than descriptive. It is different. I suppose you could say "I'm fucking glad I play baseball a lot" and it would have the same meaning more or less.


I like the capital 'o' on 'ought'. Freudian slip? Or deliberately showing us what's more important to a philosopher - the abstract over reality?

Without what is there is no way to even attempt to examine what ought to be.

This post was edited by Scaly on Jun 28 2015 02:08pm
Member
Posts: 57,901
Joined: Dec 3 2008
Gold: 285.00
Jun 28 2015 02:12pm
Quote (Scaly @ Jun 28 2015 03:07pm)
Not worth my time.



I like the capital 'o' on 'ought'. Freudian slip? Or deliberately showing us what's more important to a philosopher - the abstract over reality?

Without what is there is no way to even attempt to examine what ought to be.


It is deliberate, it is called the Is/Ought dichotomy, meaning you can in no way derive an Ought from an Is without inject some sort of your own personal bullshit into the reasoning. It is Hume, who is the man.

Way older than Freud, although he is one of my favorite philosophers as well.

This post was edited by Skinned on Jun 28 2015 02:12pm
Member
Posts: 62,204
Joined: Jun 3 2007
Gold: 9,039.20
Jun 28 2015 06:36pm
Quote (Devil_kin @ Jun 28 2015 10:14am)
stirnir offered economic and social solutions whereas kierkegaard only seems to have offered religion. that's why i say it "goes somewhere". and one day i'll get around to reading the marxman's attack on stirner, but they were spiritually and politically opposed so i'll take it with a grain of salt.



stirnir was disenfranchised with a society based on selfishness that didn't allow him, the individual, to be selfish. he mocked and derided society for the same reasons as kierkegaard.

All Things Are Nothing To Me, a short and interesting read if you're interested. and it's crawling in my skin-tier edgy.
http://www.alamut.com/subj/the_self/stirner/prefaceEgo.html


Stirner doesn't offer solutions, his egoism is purely descriptive.
Member
Posts: 62,204
Joined: Jun 3 2007
Gold: 9,039.20
Jun 28 2015 06:38pm
Quote (Skinned @ Jun 28 2015 10:57am)
It is worth mentioning that it isn't the Christian god envisioned today or then. He was an enemy of the Church...they hated him. He uses the Bible like Aesop's fables, creating philosophical and moral lessons from the stories, that are very divergent from Orthodox thought as canonized at the Councils of Nice and Trent.

I wasn't trying to start a pissing contest. I'm just saying Stirner is a lightweight :lol: And getting bogged down by the particular religion in his time and place is really missing the point, because he isn't engaging the ideas of the church, he is engaging the ideas of Kant, Hegel, and Schopenhauer and what they might mean for the church and for everyday life.

Now that cognitive science is getting to a point where we're like "shit works like Kant said", SK is becoming more and more relevant. His work has really exploded within the past 30 years, and like usual it is due to science verifying some philosopher was right about something or that the direction a particular philosopher started in finally yielded some real scientific knowledge.


You're triggering me :cry:
Member
Posts: 65,046
Joined: Jul 7 2008
Gold: Locked
Jun 28 2015 07:58pm
Go Back To Political & Religious Debate Topic List
Prev1345
Add Reply New Topic New Poll