Which philosopher can you ignore and not miss anything?

roastie getting toasty

Yea Forums resigned

Attached: 1227543.gif (220x165, 72K)

well didn't she just hit the nail right on its little incel head

Any theologian

>marie-louise
why is france so effeminate?

anyone promoted by Deleuzefag

Literally the same argument Aristophanes made two and a half thousand years later, if it were up to these people we'd still be living in mud huts worshipping totemised depictions of roasties like this bitch.
Death to the anti-intellectuals!

Attached: 1568659311370.jpg (768x960, 63K)

Actually incorrect, Augustine and Aquinas go well beyond most other philosophers

Yo, just let people be unless they're trying to like kill you or something. Also respect women man.
You can skip Mill now.

Simone Weil would beat her bloody

>female philosopher
stop, my sides can only fly so far apart from each other
do tell me what other things she has done with her philosophy other than mud fling?
rene descartes gave us i think therefore i am, the most fundamental basis and the only solid ground one can hope for in their search for the unknown
max stirner taught us that even glamorous concepts of tradition, morals, honor and whatever can and will be used against us if we blindly rely on them
soren kierkegaard taught us that to understand that which you cannot proof you have to at certain intervals take a leap of faith to explore the other side of the argument
what did she teach us apart from the fact that she likes to talk about dick and shit on others?

tl;dr you must fuck

She's a swiss born austrian lmao

If she is telling the true, then she is doing the same thing she criticizes. The entirety of her ideas are based on Jung, who would be saying nonsense by her definition. Thus, she is also saying nonsense and not telling the truth.

cont.
>young men who are abused by their mothers become suicidal and philosophy is the religion of the thinker, to seek something better the child seeks something greater than that which is material, he studies the works of those who came before them and discusses his ideas with his peers - which they believe the female mind is incapable of comprehending. he saves himself but sacrifices getting laid by prejudiced penis envy females: his only value apart from his material wealth and status that most women see in him, creativity flourishes on men who are free from women but we will still call them out on lack of creativity. man should do things in the eyes of this women, they should do things for her and if they do not they are worthless to her, she believes men cannot mold themselves without the "guidance" and "aid" of females who see them as grunts, she wants a man who does more than he thinks, those men are easier to deal with than men who question what she tells them, the primitive man who acts first and thinks later is her perfect ideal of a man, she calls them out for escapism while palely imitating their works and appears to mimic plato's wanna be witty ad hominem or nietzsches disgust for the germanic tribes, she cannot even comprehend the questions these men are asking of themselves and reality so she calls them null proving that her insecurity about the mother not understanding was just her projecting her insecurities onto others, she is not impressed by these ruminations because to her they sound like word salad because she cannot even begin to understand the world that surround her yet she seeks to put down other philosophers, those who cannot teach, judge
am i doing it right guys, am i a womyn philosopher now?

Attached: 9bd.jpg (460x288, 105K)

Plain and simple:

Jung was literally a Kantian and the man who wrote that quote is making a very specific example a generalisation of society. Just because there are a few morons who built off of Kant and were influenced by him does not mean it is Kants blame. Same is for Jung.

Attached: Jung disgusted.jpg (480x360, 12K)

>shilling Jung
Whatever it is, I'm not buying it. And stop calling me a hero

philosophy without action is not a religion. Philosophy as a transformative movement moreso. There is a glimmer of truth in what she states, but it would suggest that a man of intellect makes no effort towards transformation and escaping of the whore of babylon's clutches. I think to varying degrees this generalisation can be observed, however, we could even invoke some freudian totem and taboo to say that all advancement is in fact a desire of man to escape his predicament without having to confront his father in a battle to the death and rather achieve a reconciliation. Either way i found your post decent user, I was just baiting with that pic though.

if a child feels the need to raise arms against his father either the child or the father have done a major error somewhere along the way, perhaps even both but the only road out of cycle of hate is reconciliation and (i know please call me out on this) "hope"
for if there is no hope of reconciliation to escape the cycle of hate the world becomes a very grim and hostile place, if one cannot reconcile with that which made them how can they hope to reconcile with anything else in the world?
that was a good bait picture i loved biting down on it, 10/10 would bite again

Thus Christ exists to save man from himself.

I never had a motherly figure in my life.

This is true specially in the 20th and 21th centuries. Before that, there was still a possibility of it all meaning something.

The archetype still exists, lack of may be even more overbearing and painful than presence, as at least presence provides something to resist. We all have mothers and fathers user.

How did philosophy take us out of mud huts?

My mother was the weak one of my parents. Not controlling not strict, yet I am reading exclusively philosophy. Psychoanalysis especially the jung tradition is absolute crap. Go with freudians or leave it be. Jung is a hack

24 Jesus told them another parable: “The kingdom of heaven is like a man who sowed good seed in his field. 25 But while everyone was sleeping, his enemy came and sowed weeds among the wheat, and went away. 26 When the wheat sprouted and formed heads, then the weeds also appeared.

27 “The owner’s servants came to him and said, ‘Sir, didn’t you sow good seed in your field? Where then did the weeds come from?’

28 “‘An enemy did this,’ he replied.

“The servants asked him, ‘Do you want us to go and pull them up?’

29 “‘No,’ he answered, ‘because while you are pulling the weeds, you may uproot the wheat with them. 30 Let both grow together until the harvest. At that time I will tell the harvesters: First collect the weeds and tie them in bundles to be burned; then gather the wheat and bring it into my barn.’”

You could read the post Kant Germans (idealists, romantics etc) upto about Nietzsche and never read any of the continentals after that and still have a better understanding of continental philosophy than any literary study """theory""" and pomo pseuds. This includes Deleuze, Foucault, Derrida, Nick Land, or whoever is the latest girardfag buzzword. Most of these are just coping with Kant, Hegel, Marx, and Nietzsche. 18th C. and 19th C. still blow the 20th C. out of the water.

No, they don't

couples tend to reflect one another and shadows of observable traits exist within as opposites. The apparently uncontrolling mother may use her sex as the means of securing her self and in this manner can be considered almost fascistic. Just as the father, falling folly to the womans seductive powers, exposes his weakness and gives away his will in favour of escaping the tragedy of his own existence and death, this in itself is a fascistic manifestation in the belief that he has mastered the feminine when in fact he has been had. Alcoholism, violence, perversion, workaholism as an escape.

Go beyond where?
There comes a point when the christian circlejerk becomes unbearable.

>Which philosopher can you ignore and not miss anything?
All of them.

Sounds like the biggest cope ever for not being able to understand even the most simple philosophical concepts

sounds like incel cope

youtu.be/BZ4-4sgjNyQ

freudian shit is like a horoscope, you just read into it whatever you want to believe. you could totally accept this or reject it outright and there would be no contradiction.

Ayn Rand muh objectivism.

This.

Attached: 40BCCC7D-A642-485A-9C5A-E21612680B73.jpg (730x527, 43K)

Any postmodernist besides Lyotard, which is funny given that he coined the term . His writings about the cultural and social impacts of the cybernetization and rational instrumentalization of society are valuable.

I bet astrology actually is more scientific than Freudian theory because it's plausible that the period of the year you were born in would affect you in some way, just things like levels of sunlight or who knows what the fuck.

Kinda cringe
>masculinity!
Couldn’t care less about that. This just looks like a middle age Facebook post.

I'd say you'd be a lot better off ignoring all the psychologists instead. Every profound insight by a psychologist was already expressed more eloquently by a philosopher.

>which they think mothers do not understand
>even the very fucking paragraph proves that they don't
>THEY THINK...

>von Franz
literally Jung's worst student. just look at that statement. there is nothing curative about it. "oh too bad you were born with the wrong parents you are doomed." fuckin dumb cunt.

That level of cope...

Attached: 129897622.jpg (1280x720, 74K)

Slavoj Zizek

Philosophy is inconsequential. The entire field is just autists arguing over semantics.

Attached: C10BDFFE-E40C-4C05-B99F-D34EFAC55F9F.png (600x600, 15K)

based and agreed. real truth (God) is beyond language.

Lol this hits home for everyone that replied because it is generally accurate.

Stop. You're hurting me.

Von Franz was a Jungian, unless you're disagreeing with the quote

So basically what happened here was, she got rejected by one of her colleagues that she fancied.