Was he right?
Was he right?
He was a bitter incel weirdo with mommy issues.
So anything where that might have colored his thinking has to be questioned if not discarded.
about women 100%
the rest, kinda
have you actually read both volumes of the world as will and representation.
because it is not light reading, is why i am asking.
He was right about this. I can say that.
So essentially you're saying, yes, he was right.
10/10 haircut
Who is he?
jorge washington he led the LGBTQ rebel fleet to victory at the battle of little nig horn
YOU NEED TO BE 18 TO POST HERE!!!!!
He’s very interesting, I’d say he was definitely proto-Nietzsche
Ok boomer, go drink your milk and off too bed
Why Schopenhauer didn't marry, to those who call him an incel:
"For the unnatural position of privilege which the institution of monogamy, and the laws of marriage which accompany it, assign to the woman, whereby she is regarded throughout as a full equivalent of the man, which she is not by any means, cause intelligent and prudent men to reflect a great deal before they make so great a sacrifice and consent to so unfair an arrangement. "
-- Schopenhauer 'On women'
Yes. And almost too right. Because the truth is painful
Not if genetic engineering makes it possible to genetically engineer people to be constantly happy.
Question: If Schopenhauer was a vegan and also a red-pilled misogynist then how come every vegan nowadays is a man-hating turbo-cunt?
He was not a vegan
From the ['Prize essay on the basis of morals'](doi.org
Incidentally, compassion for animals must not lead so far that we, like the Brahmans, should have to refrain from animal food. This rests on the fact that in nature the capacity for suffering keeps pace with intelligence; which is why human beings would suffer more by renouncing animal food, especially in the North, than animals would by a quick and always unforeseen death, which should, however, be alleviated still more by means of chloroform. On the other hand, without animal food the human race would not even be able to survive in the North. By the same criterion human beings also have animals to work for them, and only the excess of strain imposed on them turns into cruelty.
He wasn't a vegan.
As far as just caring about animals, at some point the right-wing decided to take a "caring about animals is gay" position to spite the left.
I did
He’s a metaphysical genius
It (the universe and existence) is also pure objectively and conclusively nihilism, which is why Nietsche, among orhers, went apeshit on him
There has and still hasn’t been an intellectual equal to Schopenhauer
Nihilism is a moral position that one chooses to take as an individual, how can existence be objectively and conclusively nihilistic.
About Hegel? yes
About jews? yes
About women? yes
About intelligible freedom? no
Ok, I perhaps spoke out of turn, but Nietsche certainly thought Schopenhauer was a nihilistic faggot, as evident in his writings
Nietsche’s words, perhaps not mine or others
totally
people were miserable as hell before industrial revolution and this is the proof of it
ted was wrong
I'm okay with caring about animals. My problem with vegans is 1.They are usually man-hating radical feminists who blame MEN (but not women) for the existence of animal death. 2. Most vegans these days think that I'm a murderer just because I kill any mosquito that bites me.
I'm okay with taking care of cats and dogs ... but those are domestic animals. Domestic animals in general are ARTIFICIAL creatures that are only friendly because humans have bred them to be friendly. Wild animals are assholes that will kill you if you enter their personal space. Vegans are too dumb to understand this.
because man is the one trying to impose meaning upon it.
existence.
After being completely blackpilled by hoaxvid-19, I see that he was right and I was right as an edgy teen.
May chaos take the world
“Ted was wrong…”
Blasphemy!
wtf Spengler must have had mad core strength fr fr
Ted was indeed wrong
Total autist
Still based
who has hair like that
he is right that he is one of true developers of the stoic movement due to his country being controlled by spanish-turkey (ottofezic) alliance.
stoicism leads to his ideas that the root cause of the civilized man problems are relative to sublimation of desires, he deconstruct his desires to tangible universalistic feelings and that is a really decent tool to have.
in terms of governance, he isn't one of those philosophers, he has no rights as citizen and is being harassed by mansory, contrary to the worst poet to ever live (goethe), he lives the reality of his people rather than selling out to "the tower gang" as goethe proudly did, goethe sold himself and his people so he could enjoy dinners with the spanish semites (orange dutch) and other drug dealers...
this one took the shot of the hellenic man and died on the ground of europa like a honorable man would, he showed more patriotism at the end of the day than goethe or other semite sell out.
Walton Goggins will eventually
The first half of his book is spot on.
I’m not sure how he went from completely correct to bombing random people.
I was actually worried when I was reading his book because I was agreeing with everything.
Then, he stepped off the ledge.
From a certain point of view.
one of the greatest thinkers
i recommend you read his books
The industrial revolution exacerbated the problems that existed and created new ones.
Both are right, but Ted has more perspective because he came later.