What's the closest we've gotten to a bona fide philosopher king?

What's the closest we've gotten to a bona fide philosopher king?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_Islamic_philosophy
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

Mohammad or Ali was the closest though, the Caliphate idea was inspired by the philospher king idea

Marcus Aurelius
Frederick II
The Rashidun caliphs
Lenin

Pedro II was pretty close.

>be short, scrawny asiatic intellectual
>convince millions of Russian peasants and workers to kill their rightful rulers and each other
>Jewish buddies move in and take control

T-thanks Lenin

>convince millions of Russian peasants and workers to kill their rightful rulers and each other
>rightful rulers
>rightful

Then why was it hereditary?

Civil war would be with him or without him. Nicky II would also be killed one way or another.

>Then why was it hereditary?
Early caliphate was elected, though the members had to be a part of the quraysh tribe. However there were movements that advocated other forms of Caliphate, such as Ibadi or the Kharijites.

Yes, the Republic they rose against was elected and reflected the last rightful Duma until Putin.

Tsar Nicholas II was as well-intentioned a man could be while remaining committed to his birthright as Supreme Autocrat.

The Soviets were illegitimate. Only the Autocracy and the Orthodox Church had rightful authority over Russian people.

>nicky apologists have found another thread to fuck up

Being born into a particular family doesn't make you a rightful ruler of anywhere

The absolute ideal form of government would be an autocracy by an enlightened, benevolent dictator. However, this never works because:

>Limited Lifespan: even if you find the perfect guy, he's eventually going to die and you'll have nobody capable of replacing him because power has been concentrated for so long.

>If you pick the wrong guy, you're absolutely fucked because there is no way to remove him without violent revolution.

What's the Greek philosophical influence on Islam? I'm sure it's huge, but very rarely discussed

Note that I said well-intentioned, not competent. He wasn't that bright and his domineering wife made things worse.

Nicholas wasn't known as Bloody for his intentions but for how much harm he done for russian people.

In all honesty, I can't remember large chunks of it.
But when I was getting into Islamic history, I remember the book I was reading speaking extensively of the influence on Islamic thought, and the philisopher king idea influencing the Caliph idea is the one I recall best.

The book was 'a history of the arab peoples'.

> The Soviets were illegitimate.
Nicky give up crown so he was literal nobody.

> Orthodox Church had rightful authority over Russian people.
Since fucking when?

According to whom?

As the direct manifestation of the will of the Russian people, the Soviets were far more legitimate than some church hierarchy.

Which is why the Whites fought a whole civil war, I guess. And don't forget all the emigres.

Soviets refer to workers' councils, not individual Bolsheviks.

Most of the Whites were liberal democrats rather than monarchists, and many of their leaders had been represented in Soviets.

Might makes right, christfag.

>as well-intentioned a man could be while remaining committed to birthright
He was still a violent and corrupt Authoritarian, you idiot. By your standards, Kim Jong Un is the best politician alive today.

Emperor Julian

Adolf Hitler

>not knowing about Marcus Aurelius
>not being a follower of stoicism
>not keeping a copy of meditations near you always

What are you doing with your life?

Nezahualcoyotl Tlatoani of Texcoco

Augustus or Marcus Aurelius

Forgot to mention Hadiran and this faggot right here

there is no other option

not Lenin

stupid leftpol faggots

Good man.

Robert Mugabe

Khosrow I

Freddy the Great
Marcus A.
Numa (mythical, but I'd count it)

This. He was a literal philosopher, whose works are still read by many.

>Mohammad Ali

Fred the Great was a patron of artists and philosophers, not one himself. He did play a mean flute if you get my drift.

mehmed II fatih osmanoglu

He also wrote Anti Machiavel

And ditched it the moment Silesia caught his eye, but I catch your drift. The man also wrote a shitload of poetry as well.

Diocletian

I'm from a reality where he defeated Mittens

A lot of whites

Especially in the army

We're megantisemites

And composed for, and played, some badass Flute

Ashoka
Muhammad
Ali ibn Abi Talib
Umar ibn al-Khattab
Menander I
Marcus Aurelius
Frederick II (kind of)
Donald J. Trump

Islamic theological philosophy was pretty much based on Greek philosophy up until the Ashari school of thought won and Islam started to become the conservative ideology it is today.

After Al-Ghazali vehemently criticized Muslim Aristotelian philosophers in his book The Incoherence of the Philosophers from the 11th century, Greek influence on Islamic philosophy began to decline. However, Ibn Sina did become one of the most influential Muslim philosophers and yeah he borrowed from Aristotelian philosophy.

This Greco-Islamic philosophy gave rise to the Mutazilites, who believed in faith based on reasoning and logic. The Ashari school was eventually founded as the antithesis of the Mutazila, and like happens so many times in history the bad guys win after Mutazila is prosecuted in the 10th century.

Al-Kindi uses Aristotle's ideas of the first cause and the unmoved mover in his philosophy, and Ibn Sina supported Aristotle's idea that the soul originates from the heart from what i can remember.

Here's a nice wikipedia article on early Islamic philosophy:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_Islamic_philosophy

Hes a sage, not a philosopher

>king

The "science-y" "predictions" that the Quran supposedly has? Ripped wholesale from the Greeks. Lots of stuff is obviously wrong, like the notion that bones form before flesh - Galen wrote basically the same thing.

>AK
why

Came here to post this.

Charlemagne

AR-15s are for killing communists, AKs are for killing exploiters of the common people.

...

i'd say augustus. aurelius was literally a philosopher and a king, and so a literal philospher king but i'd still say augustus

Why not? He was an important intellectual prior to taking power, and helped establish a government intrinsically connected to philosophy.

The first four Caliphs were elected by a Shura Parliament. This Government was overthrown and the Umayyad Dynasty started their own Caliphate were the Caliphate was inherited. The Abbasids and Fatimids copied this

Marcus Aurelius anyone?

winner

...

The sad part is, Algazelus didn't even intend to push the spring of Islamic fundamentalism he sort of started and theology over reason in metaphysics into what would damage secular thought that doesn't contradict Islam. He was a proponent of medicines, maths, and astronomy just like any other learned polymath-scholar. He was just born into a branch of Islam that took opposition to reason where it challenged faith.

Imagine if he'd been more clear about his criticisms being leveled at the metaphysics of philosophy instead of the products of secularism and observational science for the region and world? Imagine if the Middle East had a similar and chronologically concurrent faith-theology debate alongside Western Europe's burgeoning secular reawakening after being reintroduced to the concept by Averroes' commentaries on Aristotle?

We chose the wrong timeline.

Free men always follow the strongest.

>He was an important intellectual prior

No he wasnt. He didnt even come up with anything on his own, he just doubled down on his dogmatic attraction to Marxism. And he was a shitty politician based on the fact that he only had ONE method of implementing his ideas, brutal force. He strong armed or killed or purged anyone who stood in his way.

And now hes only worshiped by disillusioned upper middle class westerners and pretentious europeans. But this isnt even about the merits of Communism or Lenin, its that Lenin was just a tyrant who did nothing other than implement someone elses ideas on economics and government, and he was only able to do this by rabble rousing, populist appeal, fear mongering, and ultimatly violence.


Theres a reason Marcus is still held in high esteem some 2000 years later.

The Tsar was very much a person who believed in his divine birth right and thought it was absurd for some starving peasant to dare question his rule.

>a follower of a philosophy is a philosopher because he kept a diary