Nietzsche, Freud and Marx are those philosophers who give us the key to understanding what is happening today...

Nietzsche, Freud and Marx are those philosophers who give us the key to understanding what is happening today. We see the underside of this world, thanks to these men. But I just now in the 20 years discovered these dudes. Fuck. I had to read this at 15, fucking shame.

I've read too much science fiction. Asimov is the greatest, but..

Hegel or bust phaggot

There is a name for this grouping: the School of Suspicion. They're all naturalists, too.

u r plebeian nigga

Did you just watch the netflix show on these guys and get tickled?

Sober down, brainlet. There are lots of books to read, lots of insights to be had, lots of "Aha!" moments, much drudgery, lots of discouragement and confusion, a disillusionment, a sense that all knowledge is futile and all theories are playing games, the crushing sense that we know almost nothing about anything.

You gotta earn those feels, Mr. I've Narrowed It Down To Three Important Figures. And you will never, ever, ever, no matter how much you read, have more than the vaguest sense of the world. If you're honest at least.

This, the only thing that can be known is that nothing can be known. Reality is absurd and thinking your finite brain can truly know anything about it is ignorance.

The subversive jews freud and marx do not belong in the same category as nietzsche.

I don't agree with you even though you said "this" to my post.

I wasn't trying to make a point about epistemology, I'm just trying to throw cold water on OP's latest discovery. I want to throw cold water on it because I don't want him to get stuck on trying to connect modernity to three specific (and really quite independent) thinkers, particularly when there is much more that accounts for our world than their thought. They are just threads running through a story that is like a rope of threads. Pay attention to all the threads, don't get too excited about three of them or one of them.

The only man that matters.

Can you actually read MacIntyre? He's wicked smart but I can't touch him. Seems like one has to have quite a grasp on history of science, philosophy etc. to engage his work.

Also he would have a serious problem with your post.

I've only read After Virtue, and I never got the impression that it was too difficult.

What's the name of this show? I'll have to work with the three of them in a upcoming course the school I teach in will offer to advanced students and I'd rather solve up their influence on modernism rather than swim through years of propaganda on every student so I can finally start talking about modern art.

true detective

TD is neither marxist nor nietzschean. I don't know enough about Freud to claim otherwise but from the little I know I doubt it's freudian either.

Geniuses of the modern world.
Pretty sure they even use that picture op had as the cover.

Thanks, I'll look for it, it's not on my country's netflix. Can you even make it work on VPNs again?

There's the Schopenhauer/cioran faggot emo cop. Freud pretty much ripped off schoppy.

nietzsche was subversive too

also he was jew

Assuming that you are talking about After Virtue. Macintryre wrote After Virtue with the purpose of it being received mainly by those outside of academia. In the Intro to the 3rd edition of After Virtue he writes:

"When recurrently the tradition of the virtues is regenerated, it is always in everyday life, it is always through the engagement by plain persons in a variety of practices, including those of making and sustaining families and households,schools , clinics, and local forms of political community. And that regeneration enables such plain persons to put to the question the dominant modes of moral and social discourse and the institutions that find their expression in those modes. It was they who were the intended and, pleasingly often, the actual readers of After Virtue, able to recognise in its central theses articulations of thoughts that they themselves had already begun to formulate and expressions of feeling by which they themselves were already to some degree moved."

From my experience Macintryre does exepect the readers to have something of the working knowledge of what he is talking about (Indeed this is probably what he is getting at at the end of the paragraph.) But he also does explain what he is talking about quite clearly. There is a Chapter at the end of After virtue where he details quite clearly the strengths and weaknesses of the political philosophy of Rawls and Nozick and then compares them to his own theory.

If you are having difficulty with him dont rush through try going a little slower and mulling over his central points, its a book that really wants to you think and engage with these ideas (not saying you havent already).

I hope that this has been helpful in someway.

I will give "After Virtue" a shot. I'm extremely impressed by MacIntyre from the bits I've read and from a lecture I watched on Youtube.

Stanley Hauerwas (who is my current preoccupation) listed him as among the smartest people alive he is aware of. He apparently forgets nothing.

His sentences are outrageously lucid. He is a man bent on communicating his thoughts as perfectly as possible.

He is a very engaging intellectual and deserving more credit as a public intellectual (which I'd wager has been held down by his Catholicism.). Macintyre is credited as being one of the most influential living thinkers in Anglophone philosophy next to Mcdowell with the exception that Macintyre is far more accessible than Mcdowell who you actually do need to know the the canon of modern philosophy.

i started reading nietzsche and freud at 15 but didn't really understand them until 25
no shame user
started reading marx at 20

You're a hypocrite for posting!

This.