Where were you when this man ended philosophy?

Where were you when this man ended philosophy?

>fedoras BTFO
>theists BTFO
>sophists BTFO
>egoists BTFO
>annihilationists BTFO
>eternalists BTFO

BASED SCHOPE

bottomline it for me, what did he say

Who?

Charles Darwin I think

>not mentioning "hegel BTFO", the most important one of all

Did you mean to post this?

The world and your perception of the world are equivalent, since to speak of a world apart from your perceiving it is meaningless.

Existence is the product of a metaphysical will or movement towards life. The internal, felt experience of all beings is this will.

The principle of beauty, great art, genius, is a sensitivity to the universal in the particular.

Music is the greatest art form.

the Muppet Show joke guy

>>eternalists BTFO
When did he accomplish this?

Lol white boi wus sad cuz hr aint got no bitchez.

Stirner didn't end philosophy, he just laid the foundation for a new beginning to philosophy.

He denied an afterlife/an eternal, individual essence that survives after death.

Zen and Taoism beat Stirner to it by thousands of years

Zen and Taoism are both spooky as fuck.

I've nothing against Schopeypoos or the contribution he made to philosophy.

However you seem to be saying "everyone that isn't clinically depressed got BTFO".

The dude should have got laid once in a while.

They are the very antithesis of spooky ya meme loving fuck

>le talking about suffering means you're depressed epin maymay

>Humanistic
>Spiritualist
>Full of esoteric nonsense.

If you told Stirner that a society resembling China is the kind of society that would develop out of his teachings he would puke.

Yeah, you haven't studied either. Both Zen and Taoism explicitly reject conceptualizations of all kind and stress the immediacy of the present. Stirner is right about everything until he stops at the ego cause he's a westerncuck, Zen and Taoism go beyond the ego.

Honestly fuck you for making yet another thread about your precious spooky drawn man

It's pretty well documented that the dude was clinically depressed.

So fucking what can anyone on this board talk about a man's ideas than what fucking meme classification he belongs to?

This is the thing though. As always in eastern spirituality the "truth" of the universe is always just whatever the progenitor of the philosophy says it is, and conveniently it often serves to maintain (if not outright justify) elaborate feudal systems.

>Stirner is right about everything until he stops at the ego cause he's a westerncuck, Zen and Taoism go beyond the ego.
This is exactly what I'm talking about. They go beyond the ego, in other words they step beyond what is and steps into spooks. It's probably no coincidence that China is and always has been ruthlessly anti-individualist when these kinds of philosophies were their bread and butter.

They make no positive claims as to what lies beyond the ego except it cannot be described by ego-mediated intellectualization/conceptualization. It would help if you knew what you're talking about.

The philosopher and the philosophy are one package, you judge them together.

Schopenhauer IS a fedora philosophy. He literally says escapism is the only temporary remedy from suffering, and that women are all whores. If he was born today he'd be an r9k brony

I told Stirner to lay down the most radical philosophy ever and he did it the madman! Hahaha

*tips*

It would help if you pulled your head out of your ass.

Buddhism is abound with wacky cosmology and life-denying. Likewise Taoism is totally saturated with bizarre superstition.

If you don't believe these kinds of religions are spooky as fuck just visit any rural Chinese village.

You have no practical experience with the reality of ego, this is obvious, yet you still dare calling Taoism a spook. Go stare in a mirror for a few hours it will do you good

>>The world and your perception of the world are equivalent, since to speak of a world apart from your perceiving it is meaningless.

Go walk into traffic and will the cars to not hit you. See what happens.

>le r9k
>EPIN!!! I win XDDD

I'm talking about the core doctrine you fucking autist

>getting so btfo you greentext incoherent symbols

Kek thanks for the mild amusement, child.

I already know what I look like.

>yet you still dare calling Taoism a spook
Yes. Taoism is self-restricting as fuck.

>he no like women he a bad man EPIN XDDD

Nice tumblr argument dipshit

>missing the point this hard

Autism.

>the core doctrine

>core doctrine
>of eastern spirituality
Thanks for outing yourself as a soul-searching white girl.

>The dude should have got laid once in a while.
hehehe

Yeah the views espoused in the Tao te Ching and Four Noble Truth. Thanks for outing yourself as a pseud

>>Autism.
There is an external reality, and that reality has an effect on you. Calling the simple recognition of this fact autism makes you an idiot.

"The fundamental defect of the female character is a lack of a sense of justice. This originates first and foremost in their want of rationality and capacity for reflexion but it is strengthened by the fact that, as the weaker sex, they are driven to rely not on force but on cunning: hence their instinctive subtlety and their ineradicable tendency to tell lies: for, as nature has equipped the lion with claws and teeth, the elephant with tusks, the wild boar with fangs, the bull with horns and the cuttlefish with ink, so it has equipped woman with the power of dissimulation as her means of attack and defence, and has transformed into this gift all the strength it has bestowed on man in the form of physical strength and the power of reasoning. Dissimulation is thus inborn in her and consequently to be found in the stupid woman almost as often as in the clever one. To make use of it at every opportunity is as natural to her as it is for an animal to employ its means of defence whenever it is attacked, and when she does so she feels that to some extent she is only exercising her rights. A completely truthful woman who does not practice dissimulation is perhaps an impossibility, which is why women see through the dissimulation of others so easily it is inadvisable to attempt it with them. – But this fundamental defect which I have said they possess, together with all that is associated with it, gives rise to falsity, unfaithfulness, treachery, ingratitude, etc. Women are guilty of perjury far more often than men. It is questionable whether they ought to be allowed to take an oath at all."

Schopie is an /r9k/ depressed virgin neckbeard. Deal with it faggot.

A reality that I perceive, that can only exist as a representation. Stop projecting extraneous bullshit on what I posted

>I think the Tao Te Ching is basically to Taoism what the bible is to Christianity
>My understanding of Zen for the purposes of this argument is as basic as the four noble truths.
lol

>he have bad wrong opinion about whoa-man he evil bad man XDD

lel cuck faggot. *tips helm*

>implying the Tao te Ching isn't the foundational text of taoism
>implying Zen isn't just Buddhist praxis stripped to a bare minimum of bullshit

stay pseud

You don't take finance advice from poor people, don't take health advice from fat people, and you don't take life advice from bitter, angry neckbeards. Schopenhauer is wrong about will and Nietzsche blew him the fuck out entirely.

You're basically saying that if you cut out all the spooky shit from Taoism and Zen, they stop being spooky. While that is an accurate statement it isn't a very useful one.

>implying foundational text is the same as core doctrine

>Zen Buddhism
>the school of Buddhism with the minimum amount of bullshit
>mfw
Zen Buddhism is ridiculously grounded in tradition.
Western watered down Buddhism probably has the least amount of bullshit. Not that it really helps because watered down bullshit is still fundamentally bullshit.

>If you told Stirner that a society resembling China is the kind of society that would develop out of his teachings he would puke.

Actually he wouldn't give a shit, because it wouldn't concern him at all.

the point is, any depiction of meaning relies on a self from which the meaning can be figured

it does NOT say that the external world doesnt exist, just that any rationalization or experience of the world necessitates a self

thanks for the intro to schop, user

What Schopenhauer conceptualiZed as a will to life Nietzsche understood as a will to power, both describing the same drive towards domination and self-proliferation that characterizes all living things. You're a fucking pleb

You forgot one crucial group, OP

>women BTFO

Nietzsche makes it very clear that Schopenhauer never understood the will at all. Nietzsche entirely rejects what Schopenhauer says on the will, confirm in his Will to Power notes. Trying to lecture me with your Wikipedia meme knowledge won't work.

he did.with whores

That really just sounds salty since he doesn't back his theory up with anything, at least not in your beautifully cherry-picked blurb.

I've been reading through Taoist philosophy and I'm surprised by the similarities. But you've got to remember that Stirner's thought is remarkable that it sprung out of a very different philosophical environment, which was dominated by the thoughts of Plato and Aristotle.

>and conveniently it often serves to maintain (if not outright justify) elaborate feudal systems.

Then you really ought to read some Taoist literature. It's pretty anti-authoritarian.

despite his r9k-tier philosophy, schoepy was actually up to his elbows in poon

The funny thing is, by /r9k/ standards, the man would have been a total Chad.

Great argument, your name calling sure convinced my that Schopenhauer isn't absolutely right there.

Nietzsche doesn't have the same crystal-clear understanding as Schopenhauer

12. Self-Sacrifice and Self-Aggrandisement

Yang Chu said: “Po-chêng-tse-kao would not part with a hair of his body for the benefit of others. He quitted his country and became a ploughman. The great Yü did not profit by his own body, which grew quite emaciated.

“If the ancients by injuring a single hair could have rendered a service to the world, they would not have done it; and had the universe been offered to a single person, he would not have accepted it.

“As nobody would damage even a hair, and nobody would do a favour to the world, the world was in a perfect state.”

Ch'in-Tse asked Yang Chu: “If by pulling out a hair of your body you would aid mankind, would you do it?”

Yang Chu answered: “Mankind is surely not to be helped by a single hair.”

Ch'in-Tse said: “But supposing it possible, would you do it?”

Yang Chu gave no answer.

Thereupon Ch'in-Tse told Meng-sun-Yang, who replied: “I will explain the Master's meaning.

“Supposing for tearing off a piece of your skin you were offered ten thousand gold pieces, would you do it?”

Ch'in-Tse said: “I would.”

Meng-sun-Yang again asked: “Supposing for cutting off one of your limbs you were to get a kingdom, would you do it?”

Ch'in-Tse was silent.

“See now,” said Meng-sun-Yang, “a hair is unimportant compared with the skin, and the skin also is unimportant compared with a limb.

“However, many hairs put together form skin, and many skins form a limb. Therefore, though a hair is but one among the many molecules composing the body, it is not to be disregarded.”

Ch'in-Tse replied: “I do not know how to answer you. If I were to ask Lao-tse and Kuan-Yin, your opinion would be found right, and so also if I were to consult great Yü and Me-ti.”

Meng-sun-Yang upon this turned round to his disciples, and spoke of something else.

>As always in eastern spirituality the "truth" of the universe is always just whatever the progenitor of the philosophy says it is, and conveniently it often serves to maintain (if not outright justify) elaborate feudal systems.

Emperor Wu: "How much karmic merit have I earned for ordaining Buddhist monks, building monasteries, having sutras copied, and commissioning Buddha images?"
Bodhidharma: "None. Good deeds done with worldly intent bring good karma, but no merit."
Emperor Wu: "So what is the highest meaning of noble truth?"
Bodhidharma: "There is no noble truth, there is only emptiness."
Emperor Wu: "Then, who is standing before me?"
Bodhidharma: "I know not, Your Majesty."

Tanzan and Ekido were once traveling together down a muddy road. A heavy rain was still falling.

Coming around a bend, they met a lovely girl in a silk kimono and sash, unable to cross the intersection.

"Come on, girl" said Tanzan at once. Lifting her in his arms, he carried her over the mud.

Ekido did not speak again until that night when they reached a lodging temple. Then he no longer could restrain himself. "We monks don't go near females," he told Tanzan, "especially not young and lovely ones. It is dangerous. Why did you do that?"

"I left the girl there," said Tanzan. "Are you still carrying her?"

Based

What are the sources for these? I know very little of East and South Asian parables like these, but I find them quite interesting.

>virgin neckbeard can't back anything up because he wants to live in a fantasy of endless submissive slave-wives

This surprises you?

lmao fucking triggered

>Buddhism is abound with wacky cosmology and life-denying

Not all Buddhism, and not all schools of Zen in particular. A fair number of them reject any and all superstitious nonsense.

>Zen Buddhism is ridiculously grounded in tradition.

There is a fundamental difference between "traditions" in Zen, which really are set of teaching tools developed to help transmit the direct experience of nonduality from teacher to student, and doctrine as such.

At its core, Zen is fundamentally about the direct transmission of the experience of nonduality from teacher to student, explixitly without reference to scripture, and has zazen and koan contemplation as it's core practices.

There is nothing inherent in Zen that involves any spookiness whatsoever.

>oh hur hur life is just terrible and if you don't agree UR DUMB
>mfw people think this is good or irrefutable

This thread serves to remind everyone that Veeky Forums has gone down the toilet, flushed by memester teens and their ebin spook man xd and any serious conversation is impossible.

actually one of his arguments for why suffering is more pervasive than happiness is you don't notice or feel your health, but you always notice pain

but nice hilarious frog meme though

They're commonly transmitted koans, the Bodhidharma one is straight up from his wiki page.

It's like poetry, they rhyme.

>It's like poetry, they rhyme.
Exactly! Whiny manbabies want their completely stupid "philosophy" thread to be taken seriously when it's vapid bait, and they want to criticize the same vapidness when it's fed back to them!

What hypocrites! LOL

>And so it lies in woman's nature to look upon everything only as a means fo conquering man.
Explains modern feminism.

>implying he's not spot-on

Doesn't he capture the phenomenon of 'gamer girls' and other kinds of girls who pretend to like something in order to gain attention from guys perfectly?

Thanks!