Name one philosopher whose "ethics" are worth taking even remotely seriously

Stirner

Attached: 519hLqogYWL._UX250_.jpg (250x370, 12K)

Attached: show-photo.jpg (348x500, 17K)

Could we possibly go into some details here?
A little bullet point. What are Hobbes ethics and why should they be taken seriously.

I mentioned Aquinas earlier. His invectives against usury are enough to make him a must-read in all schools around Europe and its former colonies. Just price theory is still the most relevant and important economic work to date.

Ragnar Redbeard

Attached: thumb_if-a-man-smite-you-on-one-cheek-smash-him-49825319.png (300x287, 67K)

No. Aquinas' ethics are evil in that they refer to the god of christianity. Aquinas is a depraved moral agent and you are bad people for defending his ethics because "muh long books", "muh 'logic' ", "muh god" and so on. You make a fetish of a man for no other reason than that he has written a long series of books; the left does this as well with Marx. Aquinas is always wrong, because god does not exist, and even if he did and if he were along the christian lines, then it would be necessary for right-thinking people to reject him, even and especially in the case that they were powerless to avoid hell. the point is to refuse tyranny.

cringe wignat faggot

ethics derived from a "philosopher" and his "ideas" will always be trash.

ethics discovered from the metaphysical order of reality and man's nature, in conformity to Divine law are essential and worth taking seriously.

Attached: 1567567347721.jpg (819x1024, 184K)

>Aquinas is always wrong, because god does not exist, and even if he did and if he were along the christian lines, then it would be necessary for right-thinking people to reject him,

"Even if gluttony, homosex and rape were objectively wrong and God said so, we would have to become obese fags and rape each other just to spite him !"

Ah yes, angsty-teen philosophy appears once more. *tips fedora*

> the point is to refuse tyranny.
Being tossed around by your passions is being a slave to tyranny. God provides freedom. Either you seek the good, true and beautiful and embody those virtues or you seek the wicked, ignorant and ugly and get owned by vices.

lol okay "rick", you forgot to write in the *burps* burps

No. There is no such thing as metaphysics, and there is no such thing as divine law. There is, however, a human nature which can be properly apprehened along right-thinking atheistic lines (historical left ideas are constitutionally incapable of it). Also the the demonstrable aesthetic fact that you chose to post a picture of an ugly black woman (and there are very handsome black women, just not that one) somehow undermines your position just a little more, since you already speak of emotional, unscientific nonsense in the first place.

Despite this, your first paragraph yet rings true. Your error is with your second graph.

I have no objection to what you've said in your second graph. That actually makes sense, because it is correct. Hatred of god is the highest good. I would have you know that I am also 35 years old.

>Being tossed around by your passions is being a slave to tyranny
W-what?
>Look, birdie. A nice golden cage. It will free you from the desire to fly so very far from me!
Stuff it up your poop chute, bitch

Worshiping God is to man as flight is to birds.

Hating what is good is insane. Good luck with your life choices.

No.
Clearly not. Clearly a lie.

Attached: 7F2B7DC6-6B2F-40A9-8E1D-0F188B4BDD5E.jpg (1280x720, 102K)

You deny the metaphysical order of things because you don't understand where you are situated in it, because you don't know yourself.

>right-wing
>atheist

pick one retard

It's in man's nature to seek God, even atheists are wrestling with him in their own way (albeit foolishly and unskillfully).

Your entire ethic is an inverted, smug tautology. The god of christianity is evil. You are wrong.

Fuck the holy spirit, fuck the holy spirit, and fuck the holy sprit. I reiterate: fuck the holy sprit. The hatred of god is the highest good. TO MURDER GOD HIMSELF, IS THE HIGHEST GOOD. FUCK GOD. to slit his throat. The pleasure of thereby doing good, because of his perfect tyranny.

“If you know that all visible things are a shadow and all pass away, are you not ashamed of playing with shadows and hoarding transitory things? Like a child you draw water with a bucket full of holes; do you not realize it and take it into account, my dear friend? As though there were nothing more serious than appearance and illusion, as though reality has been taken from them?”

+ St. Symeon the New Theologian,

Attached: st-symeon-the-new-theologian.jpg (788x1141, 307K)

>reads nietzsche once
>misunderstands everything anyways
>comes to Yea Forums and spouts stuff like this

The so-called 'murder of God' will only be preceded by the murder of man. But all our degeneracy and self-deception will be exposed in the final calculus.

based

I've never read Nietzsche beyond a few pages of the Genealogy of Morals, I am simply possessed of a salutary hatred of (the notion of) god, due to my ability to perceive reality accurately. It's important to understand here that the god, being false, serves only as a strawman with which the others are benighted.

Suppose the reality of this wretched creature. I look forward to the opportunity to tell him to go fuck himself, to his face, in those few imaginary minutes which will not take place.

If the "murder of man" consists of taking that part of the human mind (there is no such thing as a soul) which is able to conceive of god and simply ripping it out, forever destroying it, then this is a welcome development-even if it leads to the extinction of the species.

You're so edgy user. Imagine actually being so cucked that you 'hate' something you claim to nto believe in, if the notion of god angers you so much why the fuck do you talk about god so much. You're probably a 'converted ex-christian' who read some trendy atheist article and now you claim to "hate god because religion stopped human development :(((("

this. ahahaha very based user

>Suppose the reality of this wretched creature. I look forward to the opportunity to tell him to go fuck himself, to his face, in those few imaginary minutes which will not take place.
>Fuck the holy spirit, fuck the holy spirit, and fuck the holy sprit. I reiterate: fuck the holy sprit. The hatred of god is the highest good.
>No. Aquinas' ethics are evil in that they refer to the god of christianity. Aquinas is a depraved moral agent and you are bad people for defending his ethics because "muh long books", "muh 'logic' ", "muh god" and so on.

Attached: most powerful image online.jpg (800x960, 93K)

egoism is begging to be combined with metaphysical solipsism

Shut the fuck up reddit

I reiterate that I am 35 years old, and live peacefully. No tattoos, no Monster drinks. Veneration of god (the true cuckoldry) just activates my almonds, because it never rests on any real ground. Especially when it is done by Yea Forums posters aged about twenty because it's currently fashionable to affect a certain traditionalism, or catholicism, or something.

-(but muh god, muh proofs!) So, show me his body (they didn't, you didn't. Not one time, and not through failure of attention on my part).
-(but muh subtle scientific mysteries) So, show me his body.
-(b-but society falls into degeneracy absent god) I cheerfully concede this one, but it's beside the point, because you're already living in a godless world /anyway/. The point is not the necessity of god (god can never possibly be necessary, something wanting demonstration which I will not make in the small space of this post apart from the above), but the /necessity of human beings to do without god/. That is, the seeming human predilection for religion (stories/community) is a /deficiency in the species itself, which must eventually be overcome, exactly because it is at odds with godless reality. I bet Nietzsche has a similar idea but I wouldn't know as I've never actually read Nietzsche, as I'd already said above.

Much of the god stuff on Yea Forums, as on /pol/ and other "cultural" boards for the past five years or so, has taken on an unwarranted and uncritical meme-legitimacy, basing itself in prior (also illegitimate) traditions* (Aquinas chief among them-the entire Summa is a textbook for the Already Convinced, when I began reading it I was relieved. "Is that all you've got? This is the currently imagined heavyweight of the children who are affecting 'Western culture' in its last gasps?"

*additionally, an old, true saw: the word "religion" itself connotes an unwarranted truth-content; there is of course no such thing. There have only ever been cults that stuck.

I think you gave me this image once before. I will begin to take note of your usages, as a badge of honor.

don't think i've ever seen this much cope in one post on Yea Forums before, congrats user, ur prize is that no one will read this :)

>catholicism
>currently fashionable

buddy, it's been fashionable for 2 millennia now

The more I learn the more I believe this to be true.

You are confusing cope with reality. You are incapable of argument. You couldn't do it, even if you wanted to.

>The more lies I take in the more I believe them

Attached: 3F0B6E4D-D7FC-4DEB-A608-AA89556373E9.png (210x442, 142K)

Stirnerism just collapses to Christianity when you consider that Christianity—and hence eternal paradise for the righteous—is true, and therefore the most beneficial action is that which is accordance with Christianity.

Attached: 675px-Cathédrale_Notre-Dame-de-l'Assomption_de_Montauban_-_Vision_de_Marguerite-Marie,_religie (675x1023, 192K)

*is in accordance

>you consider that Christianity—and hence eternal paradise for the righteous—is true
So if you accept that false things are true then true things are false. At last I see, the truth is blind.

Not an argument, coping fedoracuck.

Attached: 1568247424088.jpg (680x588, 51K)

>not an argument
Why would I argue with someone who won't change their mind, don't assume everyone is as stupid as you are midwit.

Why are people arguing against god always vindictive and spiteful. Always resorting to their self proclaimed superior ways in which they process reality and understand it. As many anons before have stated its mans job to find god. Your denial only reflects your egoism and shallow material view. its a self destructing argument. One that may take many incarnation cycles for some to comprehend. I'm not claiming believing god will somehow automatically transcending. But living righteously surely leaves a better live to reflect on. I'm slowly understanding that not every one can be saved, or for that matter wants to be saved.

Kant, mill, Aristotle. You didn’t say you needed to agree with them btw.

*Be transcending

Nice cope, buddy. Keep pretending that's the only reason you won't defend your views, you pussy/retard.

>Sterner
>Implying

I bet not a single one of you retards has actually read his work. I went to the effort of reading The Ego and His Own and it's continental horseshit. No formal structure, non arguments, and teenage angst characterise his work.

The only non-Greek philosopher worth anyone's time is Kant. The sooner you learn this the better.

Attached: Helot.jpg (236x523, 21K)

>*Stirner

>Muh left wing
>Muh right wing
Grow up and learn to differentiate between political concepts and ideologies instead of some vague definition. Also: not everyone considers himself left or right wing.

>implying god is a being
>implying god can be resisted
>implying a being that your existence is wholly within can be "tyrannical" toward you

>If you know that all visible things are a shadow and all pass away, are you not ashamed of playing with shadows and hoarding transitory things?

no because i am a materialist and an empiricist and don't believe in metaphysics, god, the heavens and hell, and any eschatological destiny for man. so the "shadows that pass away" is all i have.

>You make a fetish of a man for no other reason than that he has written a long series of books
Another fucking telepath.
BILLY! GET THE HOSE!

Honestly, Hare.

Materialism is a metaphysical position.

Attached: sloterdijk.jpg (440x228, 17K)

You are so cringe and I hate that I now know you exist

your proposition that it's "man's job to find god" seems completely arbitrary. your conclusions that you draw from it are correct, but again I have no reason to accept the premise.
>thinking Kant is all there is to modern philosophy
enjoy staying in your intellectual bubble. I'm not even defending Stirner, your last statement is just willful ignorance.

>Aquinas is always wrong, because god does not exist
imagine calling yourself a reader and thinking any person on the planet is even capable of being "always wrong". are you even aware of how impossible that is?
I'm an atheist btw.

Attached: n047p07b[1].jpg (250x344, 21K)

Attached: 149359717861.png (551x550, 334K)

>35 years old
>Hatred of god is the highest good.
>I am simply possessed of a salutary hatred of (the notion of) god, due to my ability to perceive reality accurately.
I usually never call out anyone like this but please either leave here and go to reddit or end your life. What a pitiful man.

have you or your parents ever been diagnosed with a mental disorder?

leave this website and come back when you're over 18.

Spinoza. Any other questions?

That is still an ethics system.

the right wing is the normative politics for well over two thousand years of known history around the world, only monarchists can be right wing. everyone else is left :) that's the original meaning of the term and it still has meaning today, even though things have swung so far left that monarchy isn't even consider a viable position at all

f p b p

I've unironically been using this website since early 2004, and have spent something like under 24 lifetime hours even looking at reddit. not going anywhere and you can't make me.

You've been here for years and not developed at all in wisdom.
Probably repeating the same arguments your teenage version was making, except now they are more long winded and rambling.

Bro c'mon I'm not even the guy you responded to but even I know that Stirner advocates for the rejection of fixed ideas such as those required to attain "heaven" or eternal life via Christianity. Its one of the first processes one has to undertake to shed the spooks and attain what is truly in your self-interest.

Holy shit fpbp

I get what you mean but that's still a deontological position and by generalization an ethical position. Even if he's negating those categories it still falls within that kind of discourse.

You're the best troll I've seen here in a month

this
and Jesus, because Christ is king

>atheist cope

Attached: begome-gadolig-ddi-17754311.png (500x522, 89K)

lol, somebody needs a tardwrangler
I imagine this guy getting frustrated at work and furiously typing away with a foaming mouth and intsense focus while his coworkers can clearly tell that he is not doing his job lol.

pls elaborate

No

positing anything about the noumenal is inherently metaphysical. not that guy but that's what I'm assuming he's getting at.

Making universal truth claims (all that exists is matter) goes beyond any particular experience of matter we may have and empirical justification. Universals aren't bits of matter they are abstract metaphysical concepts themselves.
Problem of universals.
Problem of induction.

Also problem of appearance vs reality, like the Kant guy said,the thing in itself is hard to approach, so we're already doing metaphysics even if we say "all there is is matter"

Aristotle. Ethics begin with individual existence.

>replying to butterfly
stop

Aristotle and Kant

Spbp

>I bet Nietzsche has a similar idea but I wouldn't know as I've never actually read Nietzsche
kek you dont even read

Chuang Tzu

Cringe faggot you should feel deeply embarrassed for making us all uncomfortable by your ignorance.

Attached: 9ugqsda6zbt21.jpg (600x388, 53K)

Not a troll. t. that guy

>lacan was socrates