Name a worse philosopher

Brainlet Russell

>The best nietzschean since Nietzsche
That would be Colli

I genuinely can't

ok analytic philosophy doesn't even count

Degenerate pedophile Marxists detected.

These

Post your work.

...

Whoever the fuck this scrublet is. I watched Molymeme's video on the article Slavoj wrote about Peterson and holy shit I agree, if this is what passes for philosophy these days sign me up for UPB indoctrination because if this guy is the best the left has to offer they are in serious shit.
and people give Libertarians shit for our modern day titans with their above average hygiene, baka

/thread

While Foucault was definitely a detestable queer, I like his philosophy in that we assume ourselves to be in constant progress in all things but in reality there are some things in the past we actually did better. If we actually pulled our head out of our own asses we would find there is a lot to discover in historical analysis.

does peterson shit on foucault?

his article was pretty bad hardly talked out peterson, you guys memed him up to much.

Sartre

is he the worst all-time?

Sad you believe this sadder you posted this.

I was gonna second this one:
But I just googled Slavoj's article on Peterson because of:
and it put him over the line.
>Jacques Lacan wrote that, even if what a jealous husband claims about his wife (that she sleeps around with other men) is all true, his jealousy is still pathological: the pathological element is the husband's need for jealousy as the only way to retain his dignity, identity even. Along the same lines, one could say that, even if most of the Nazi claims about the Jews were true (they exploit Germans, they seduce German girls, and so on) – which they are not, of course – their anti-Semitism would still be (and was) a pathological phenomenon because it repressed the true reason why the Nazis needed anti-Semitism in order to sustain their ideological position

>a male human wanting exclusive sexual access to a female is "pathological"
>not wanting to be cucked is pathological
>It's just like nazis, ya get me?

Honestly, Foucault had some pretty useful ideas. You just have to dig through a lot of French philosopher style blabbering to find them. I'm certain I've never read a original or useful idea from shirt tugger and I have tried a bit.

Foucault was not, by any means, the first philosopher to deny progress as you describe; though he's probably the most famous one.

This! Everybody ITT hating on Foucault should hate his SJW followers and their half baked interpretation of Foucault not the OG himself

Prove me wrong.

Premise 1: Privations are not qualities in themselves
Premise 2: appetites are privations
Premise 3: It is necessary for there to be appetites (in the form of wants needs and impulses) for there to be personal being

-Harm is the privation of Benefit just as Bad is the privation of Good
-A Being can be benefited or harmed on the basis of its personal wants, needs and impulses (whatever those may be) being either fulfilled or exacerbated respectively
-A maximization of benefit is the fulfillment and nullification of the entire record of wants needs and impulses
-A being without appetites fails to be a personal being (premise 3)
-The maximization of benefit engenders a condition already satisfied in the non-existence of a personal being
-therefore to come into existence is to be harmed

Well he indiscriminately hates all postmodernists and does not acknowledge any differences between them, so yes

...

>argues from conceivability

You weren't kidding

Get out.