"Culture isn't dead."

...

Silly. None of those figures were revered in their life time the way pop culture figures are now. Literacy is higher than it has ever been. Your average college math student knows all the theories of mathematicians up to about 1900. Your problem is adhering to "cult of the genius" ideology.... We have plenty of brilliant thinkers right now in many different countries.

Manners have certainly taken a hit, though.

>this picture is insane. shouldn't it just say "ignore everyone?" by those standards who isn't a pseudo-intellectual rhetorician? chomsky, zizek, hitchens, bloom. i don't
>>no peterson
>hmm

You're a pseud. Sorry, buddy.

>Silly. None of those figures were revered in their life time the way pop culture figures are now. Literacy is higher than it has ever been. Your average college math student knows all the theories of mathematicians up to about 1900. Your problem is adhering to "cult of the genius" ideology.... We have plenty of brilliant thinkers right now in many different countries.

Reverence is a side issue, you absolute buffoon.

The point is the quality of their work. If you honestly think any modern """"philosopher"""" matches the likes of Hume then you should kill yourself with a cattle rod.

Comedians aren't supposed to be intellectuals. That's a problem of the audience, not the comic.

hi
don't about what you don't know
thanks

what gives you the right to decide quality and not the populace masses? the worker has liberated your aesthetics.

...

>>no peterson

Peterson is there

shit you're right

>the right to decide quality
Probably the same thing that gives you the right to demand lawful behavior towards you. No, it is not the state.

You know we're only 17 years into this century, right?

Where are Bob Brandom, Slavoj Zizek, and Gorgio Agamben

Hume's ideas have dissolved into the popular culture. Nobody needs to "match" him.

That's not the point, brainlet.

by 1917 we had a world war

what do we have? ain't shit

do you honestly think the state matters anymore? completely fluid movement is possible over the borders of the world. all that matters for power is money. the economic output of the disney corporation, fed by supporters around the world could topple nations.

with the rise of outsourcing, nations don't matter anymore. only ideologies retweeting each other into the long dark night.

Tell me you are a woman. I need an excuse to forgive your lack of ambition.

Slavoj Zizek is a sad old bear with his rusting guillotine that has to keep jumping through self-crated loops of voodoo jargon "theory" to make Marxism even thinkable in the 21st century. Not that he doesn't have interesting ideas, but still.

People still reach the same quality of writing and thought but it's just more specialised non-fiction than what early industrialist societies produced. Capitalism has advanced since then and with it literacy and education. I take it you don't read much non-fiction?

When did you realise Capitalism is the cause of all of this?

>Chomsky is a pseud
>Atom-bombing Man-Dingo is identified as an intellectual

Literally what?

>do you honestly think the state matters anymore? completely fluid movement is possible over the borders of the world. all that matters for power is money. the economic output of the disney corporation, fed by supporters around the world could topple nations.
So, the states don't matter because the corporations use the enforce their will?

I mean nationhood has always been a trash concept, but clearly its not irrelevant when they make laws that the proletariat must obey and are still considered an authority by most people.

>compares great artists/polymaths/philosophers/scientists of yore with pop-entertainers of now
No shit, Sherlock.

>nationhood has always been a trash concept
Rootless cosmopolitans get the fuck out. I seriously hope you're some sort of antinatalist, people devoid of thymos like you shouldn't procreate.

The state has had me serve a year in slavery. The state these days is about number crunching and management. All for the ease of commerce, because people would buy their ideal lives if they could. Or maybe they would sell them.

There are no ideologies anymore. Not in the sense that ideals would guide people. No, the only thing that remains is a set of opinions, reactions and social signaling. All three ideologies are dead, and good riddance. They were all different methods of reaching the mouse utopia anyway.
What follows is barbarism, obscuriantism, occultism, vanity. The brutality of man will rear its head soon enough, since the social constructs of old were in the way of the mouse utopia. Makes me wonder if this is all a more extravagant iteration of the lemmings and their behavior.

A while ago. When did YOU realize that communism isn't the solution to the problem?

If anything we need to return to mercantilism and monarchy.

>lack thymos
>for a legal fiction that has only existed for 200 years

Both already collapsed

>because our mouse utopia will never be there, since you will all die in poverty and violence

Communism isn't any more concerned with the truth than Capitalism is, though, except when it's to further ideology - a model of reality that is both unquestionable and false. Re: The collapse of biology under Stalin with his pet lamarckian fraud.

>legal fiction
The union of the little Germanies would like to have a talk with you.

shit dude i forgot about prison. the ability to incarcerate someone is indeed powerful. it isnt, i would hope, something the disney corporation could get away with. at least not yet.

let me restructure my claim: the state is no longer the most powerful decider of global change.

can even the power of a president prevail against the deep state? bumper sticker manufacturers and late night television hosts can alter the enforcement and litigation of public policy by getting enough of their drones to retweet things

>those lists
well, that's what you get for sticking with the baroque past the 18th C: rococo. don't say voltaire didn't warn you.

Monarchism fell to lies. If you are looking for political prisoners, look for US/NATO prisons, look for the laws and regulations that allow detainment of political threats or their eradication with machines. If you want to look for tyranny, see how brazenly the globalists act in sovereign states of Libya, Syria, Afghanistan, Iraq... Look how Brexit is being handled! Revenge after revenge, threat after threat. Same for Crimea.
Equality has brought only horrible things to this world, and is the reason beauty can be solely found on the pages of history, right before we return to prehistory.

>>compares great artists/polymaths/philosophers/scientists of yore with pop-entertainers of now
>No shit, Sherlock.

Name 10 greats of today.

You've got 10 minutes.

I wasn't in prison, I was conscripted. Your point still stands, I merely wanted to point that out.

So nations are a thing, just ask the diverse German tribes that were at each others throats for ages until they were united by the Franks? Then kept fighting each other until Bismarck? Lmao, great unity of spirit you have there bro.

>Monarchism fell to lies

Nah

I know, but what I'm saying is that if we're looking for a "golden age of culture," then most people would peg its span from the beginning of the Renaissance to start of World War I. What ran the world in that time? Monarchy and mercantilism.

Not him but I just want to confirm you're purposely being disingenuous right?

Six minutes, now.

You can never go home again

There were no political prisoners found, and most of the negative of the economic policies were a direct follow-up to enlightenment thinking and new policies.
The revolution was bullshit, and so was everything that followed. Why would you decapitate your equals? Why would you force marriage upon your equals? Why would you do it en masse? To have revenge for prisoners who never existed? To free the jewry?
They did it because they were subhumans, and their amount grew too high for the political structure to hold together.

Take Varg out!

>their amount grew too high for the political structure to hold together.

So you mean it collapsed.

>Poster derides me for comparing the greats of the past to pop-icons today
>Ask him to name greats of today
>Still can't do it

Wew, this debate is always easy to win:

>"You just have to find them!!"
>"Ok, can you give me some names?"
>"..."

Like I said, not him, but you answered my question indirectly.

Yes no one is going to engage with someone being disingenuous. If you were serious I would have helped you think.

Only in France did the collapse happen by its own force. After that, it was foreign banks funding revolts one after another. Now that we have the Internet, we can finally go back since we have access to forbidden knowledge, such as the pyramid scheme of banking and usury, the validity of antisemitism, religious beliefs, social structures, patriarchy, beauty... Would there be no Internet, we'd be tied to TV, newspaper and Radio, which are all controlled sources of information.
Books of course would exist, but their importance is always a niche.

>Yes no one is going to engage with someone being disingenuous. If you were serious I would have helped you think.

12 minutes up.

Thanks for playing.

I could, but I'm pretty sure I'm gonna receive some autistic contrarian hurrdurr about greats not being great enough or not great at all. In the end, isn't edgy memeing the whole point of this shitty thread? So why bother.

Now your turn, name 10 greats of 1717. You have unlimited time.

Literally named 10 great 18th century thinkers in the OP.

Why use real knowledge when we could just LARP as monarchists

Not really, look at the Vendeé and the Bourbon restoration. The system only collapsed because some aristocratic and bourgeois retards thought that Reason was something transcendental, and half of them got executed for it - look at Condorcet and Robespierre. Only Napoleon managed to save the Revolution by making it resemble the previous system.

>I could, but I'm pretty sure I'm gonna receive some autistic contrarian hurrdurr about greats not being great enough or not great at all. In the end, isn't edgy memeing the whole point of this shitty thread? So why bother.

Just name them. I'll be honest with my opinions. Ignore posts which are not sincere. They won't be mine.

1717, follow instructions

Nice try, pleb but my request to the other poster was for the past 17 years not a single year.

Keep trying, brainlet.

>"It wasn't a real collapse!"
>system is still defunct

Google "survivorship bias."

I don't mean people born in 1717 you idiot. It's a direct parallel to your request. It's not hard, stop stalling

Reddit.

This possesses the inherent assumption that there WERE people that didn't survive which is a false comparison to those that DID INDEED survive because we have factual evidence that they did.

Nice Wikipedia article, loser. I love using logical fallacies in my reddit debates!

that doesn't really seem relevant

Well, we can't. Law enforcement would be onto us quite quickly. Despite their reluctance to honor social constructs, they do like to pretend that those advantageous to them hold value. Hence we have conscription, despite being led by globalists. Likewise, they may not like revolutions that want to decapitate them as much as they worship the revolutions that decapitated their predecessors.

The world works with money now, so the correct solution would be to become a mafia and then spread mercantilism. The kingpin would end up the king. No need to have too quick changes all around, we like conservatism. As Hitler said, if you want to change a rule, you obey the rules of the system, get on top and change the system.

Yeah, France never recovered from the Revolution. It was a superpower that threatened to take over Europe thanks to its comparatively huge population and now it's an USG protectorate

>I don't mean people born in 1717 you idiot. It's a direct parallel to your request. It's not hard, stop stalling

>Isaac Newton
>Jean Meslier
>Giambattista Vico
>Dimitrie Cantemir
>Justus Henning Boehmer
>Benito Jerónimo Feijóo y Montenegro
>Christian Wolff
>Ludvig Holberg
>George Berkeley
>Emanuel Swedenborg
>Montesquieu
>Voltaire
>Benjamin Franklin
>David Hume
>Jean-Jacques Rousseau

All lived during 1717

Only people who were great during 1717. Please use your head

And the goalposts go round and round... Why not just chin up and accept your defeat with dignity? This is an anonymous forum, after all.

You won't receive any more responses from me, you redditor.

I never compared years. I compared centuries. I know what you are trying to do.

>Haha, you can't name 10 great from 1717 therefore your arbitrary timeframe doesn't make sense!

As though the timeframe of a century I used in the OP is in any way comparable to the one of a single year you have given.

TLDR; Kill yourself.

Your point isn't as great as you try to believe.

I don't think that humans have a real issue to admit defeat to others. At least for men, not submitting after a loss can mean death, so there is a mechanism letting it happen. However, a defeat to yourself... How on earth would biology cope with that? By evolving a consciousness to handle such cases?

The goalposts have been the same the whole time but it is purposely being misinterpreted. It's a request in the spirit of asking for great thinkers of 'today' transposed to the early 18th century. What was Voltaire doing that was so great in 1717? If he were alive today we wouldn't know his name.

>If Voltaire wasn't Voltaire, we wouldn't know his name

Wew, really made me think...

Pretty sure this is a fruitless exercise anyway because we won't know how important this or that thinker will be in 300 years. Not all the people mentioned in the OP had their sucked as hard back the as we do now.

Will Eion Musk be the Isaac Newton of the 21st century?

Will Chomsky be the Thomas Mann?

Either way if you mention those two, you will get people calling you a pleb anyway because of the naysayers.

You're comparing a complete century with an incomplete one. That's why I was asking if you were being disingenuous because it's quite obviously a stupid thing to do. Do you want me to tell you all the great people of 2075?

There has been a steady flow of geniuses up until recently. Who shut it down?

If he was some 23-year old arrested for speaking out against the government he wouldn't qualify as 'great'.

Chomsky is a pseud.

Elon Musk is intellectually inept but a great man in terms of innovation and technological progression and clearly intelligent. Stupid people don't become billionaires. That being said, he lacks a philosophical capability and suffers from the same Silicon Valley autism that Thiel suffers from.

>You're comparing a complete century with an incomplete one. That's why I was asking if you were being disingenuous because it's quite obviously a stupid thing to do. Do you want me to tell you all the great people of 2075?

Except you still haven't named ONE. Throughout this entire discussion. You didn't name ONE of the past 17 years.

No one shut it down it's just specialised knowledge now or dismissed because of politics.

>Pretty sure this is a fruitless exercise anyway because we won't know how important this or that thinker will be in 300 years. Not all the people mentioned in the OP had their sucked as hard back the as we do now.

If the people in this post are revered in 300 years time then we are truly lost

>shouldn't it just say "ignore everyone?"
That's some solid advice though, user.

Like I said I wasn't the guy you requested that of. You can use that same Wikipedia timeline of Western philosophers and skip to the 1900-2000 section if you want some idea. You should probably note how long it is compared to the 18th century.

>or dismissed because of politics
They did it with Voltaire and Gandhi. Voltaire is now buried in the Panthéon of Paris and India might get plumbing in the next millenia.

>E-Rodg isn't in the pic
As it should be

>Chomsky is a pseud
>proving me right.

Thanks bro. Either way we will have to wait until the end of the century to give you a full list of people you disagree with now but are considered intellectual greats 400 years from now.

>That being said, he lacks a philosophical capability and suffers from the same Silicon Valley autism that Thiel suffers from
Remeber that time that time when Isaac Newton did all kinds of Harry Potter shit to try and prove there was no Trinity of Christ? I member, but most people don't because they only care about gravity and science.

>Like I said I wasn't the guy you requested that of. You can use that same Wikipedia timeline of Western philosophers and skip to the 1900-2000 section if you want some idea. You should probably note how long it is compared to the 18th century.

Wew, this brainlet is so insecure that he not only thinks I haven't memorised the article word for word 6 years ago for this exact discussion but that Wikipedia is somehow an unreliable source.

>Wikipedia is somehow an unreliable source.

How did you infer that? And if you've memorised it you know where the answer is so you can probably go ahead and delete this thread now or hang out in the Veeky Forums version.

Don't put Harry Potter, theology and occultism in the same pot.