Why are the works of Bertrand Russell so derided on this board?

I thought it had been taken over by Reddit athiests.

Attached: quote-russell-s-books-should-be-bound-in-two-colours-those-dealing-with-mathematical-logic-ludwig-wittgenstein-138-63-39.jpg (850x400, 78.09K)

Did anyone else find his History of Western Philosophy a chore to get through?
For most of the book he seems so eager to disprove the philosophers he covers that he'll barely explain their beliefs before refuting them for pages and pages, as if he were debating with a contemporary. He definitely plays favorites, especially with Spinoza.

Attached: 811oTv-9xJL.jpg (1648x2560, 336.17K)

You must be 18 years or older to post on this site

It wasn't a chore to get through since his prose is very engaging. The problem is that it's inaccurate and biased a lot of the time, and, like you said, goes on for pages refuting people he disagrees with while hardly explaining their ideas.

Kind of. Anyway, the best history of philosophy is that of Frederick Copleston, who discussed with, and refuted, Russell.

Attached: images - 2022-04-13T144822.483.jpg (682x449, 34.34K)

This is an athiest board. Copleston was a theist so cannot be taken seriously.

>But despite those problems, he generally helped atheism's cause, so why does he have a bad reputation here? This board seems to be mostly atheist
You'd be surprised.

This is totally correct.

>This is an athiest board.
It's a Christian board now :)

I was shocked at how unbelievably stupid his moral stances were.

No it isn't. Most people on here are fairly intelligent.

Your trip alone is in contradiction to your shitty religion, faggot.

>with the exception of Leibniz
Care to elaborate on this? I read his History of Western Philosophy, and what you said about parroting academics rings true.

is that why it's so shit now?

Are they?
Thought he'd be popular, he's basically what all the current batch of self help dudes wish they were.

>This board seems to be mostly atheist.
Thought it was mostly Americans trying to larp as Catholics.

Because he was a cuck.

Next question!

Because this board is full of idealist brainlets who cant comprehend analytical logic.

He was a cuck who litterally raised his wife's son. Two times.

Thats just how the british upper class works

yeah, the christian ones

Because pic related

Attached: Russell BTFO.jpg (601x697, 234.37K)

You are not Christian, at best you are a gnostic who takes inspiration from Church father writings for his ethnics.

holy BASED

I think I will read some DH Lawrence.

I've also noticed this very strange trend where the people who talk the most about love and peace are also the most misanthropic and anti-human. I remember one of these types talking to me about black lives matter and making some very decent points. Then some other event happened in my neighborhood (can't remember what) and they said the most disgusting things.

don't like him because he was dumb and arrogant

Basado

>Christian
>Has the best History of Philosophy
get rekt redditor

Because he was completely inferior to Gödel, whose contributions to the Logic field actually made it what it is today. He also proved that Russell's magnum opus, the Principia Mathematica, is only useful as a paperweight.
Yet philosophers still regard Russell highly and not Gödel, because they are morons.

Attached: gödel.jpg (397x514, 18.27K)

>intelligence is truth
Dang got him
Honestly the opposite - I've been here for 8 years

>You are not Christian,
Did you pretend to know everything for this post and then call someone gnostic? cute

Based Witty, consistently btfoing his mentor

The works of Bertrand Russell fall in two categories. The first category consists in his logic, metaphysics, epistemology, philosophy of mind/perception, philosophy of language, and philosophy of mathematics. This is where he is at his brightest. His contributions in these fields are solid and have repercussions to this day. However, Yea Forums hates analytic philosophy as a rule so they don't really like this material much. For what it's worth, Russell was a platonist about universals, and at various times a substance dualist, a phenomenalist, and a property dualist about mind and matter, two views that I think many people on Yea Forums would not associate with scientism at all, that's just to prove Russell isn't a materialist, contrary to what said. The second category consists in Russell's history of philosophy, ethics, philosophy of religion, political philosophy, and cultural critique. This is Russell's popular philosophy, and what Yea Forums and everybody generally knows him best for. But everybody, even the people who like the other side of Russell, finds this second side of Russell more or less worthless and too polemical. Unfortunately Yea Forums doesn't realize Russell had the first side, or doesn't take it seriously. The second category is not Russell at his brightest, just Russell at his most vocal. Nobody in philosophy reads that stuff or cares about it.

Attached: Frussell.png (173x218, 40.68K)

>Such, in outline, but even more purposeless, more void of meaning, is the world which Science presents for our belief. Amid such a world, if anywhere, our ideals henceforward must find a home. That Man is the product of causes which had no prevision of the end they were achieving; that his origin, his growth, his hopes and fears, his loves and his beliefs, are but the outcome of accidental collocations of atoms; that no fire, no heroism, no intensity of thought and feeling, can preserve an individual life beyond the grave; that all the labours of the ages, all the devotion, all the inspiration, all the noonday brightness of human genius, are destined to extinction in the vast death of the solar system, and that the whole temple of Man's achievement must inevitably be buried beneath the debris of a universe in ruins--all these things, if not quite beyond dispute, are yet so nearly certain, that no philosophy which rejects them can hope to stand. Only within the scaffolding of these truths, only on the firm foundation of unyielding despair, can the soul's habitation henceforth be safely built.
...
>Brief and powerless is Man's life; on him and all his race the slow, sure doom falls pitiless and dark. Blind to good and evil, reckless of destruction, omnipotent matter rolls on its relentless way; for Man, condemned to-day to lose his dearest, to-morrow himself to pass through the gate of darkness, it remains only to cherish, ere yet the blow falls, the lofty thoughts that ennoble his little day; disdaining the coward terrors of the slave of Fate, to worship at the shrine that his own hands have built; undismayed by the empire of chance, to preserve a mind free from the wanton tyranny that rules his outward life; proudly defiant of the irresistible forces that tolerate, for a moment, his knowledge and his condemnation, to sustain alone, a weary but unyielding Atlas, the world that his own ideals have fashioned despite the trampling march of unconscious power.
www3.nd.edu/~afreddos/courses/264/fmw.htm#:~:text='",henceforward must find a home.

It's his nihilism that disturbs me most

Yeah a hack really

Well, this is more poetic than what I would've expected given the way people talk about him.

>confidently wrote about philosophies he didn't even remotely understand or care to learn about
>was a literal and actual cuck whose wife fucked other men with his approval until she became pregnant at which point he seethed at her infidelity
>is the 20th century equivalent of Richard Dawkins with his fedora tipping and proto I love science attitude
Gee user, idk.

Fucking rekt

he promotes atheism, logicism and positivism. this board is a god loving, platonic world of mathematics believing, panpsychist discussion forum.
S.D.G

Yeah he can be a fantastic writer. He was a popular writer at a critical time when a viewpoint like his was countercultural and exciting. That's why he endures.

You tried hard to summon some witty quip and failed miserably. Better luck next thread.

I'm going to assume you're being sarcastic and know that Russell was a platonist and a panpsyschist.

This seems more typical of Russell when he was very old, circa his 1970 On Being Modern-Minded essay, or the time he made news for recommending a preemptive nuclear strike on the Soviet Union. (An episode treated in Poundstone's Labyrinths Of Reason.) Earlier Russell, who boiled down ethics to "don't be a cunt" or words to the effect, or in anything extra-analytical, including his blatantly and deliberately biased History, is in that mode too much to be the comedian to qualify as a philosopher--the respective rankings of both implied here. Goethe's notion that all men, when they're old enough, turn into King Lear isn't far off, and though he was an exception, Russell wasn't I still rather enjoy the younger Russel both ways, analytical and comic.

Yea Forums is fucking retarded when it comes to math and it sure as fuck isn't Platonist. See the Zeno threads where dumb asses screech how infinite summations aren't real.

This seems more typical of Russell when he was very old, circa his 1970 On Being Modern-Minded essay, or the time he made news for recommending a preemptive nuclear strike on the Soviet Union. (An episode treated in Poundstone's Labyrinths Of Reason.) Earlier Russell, who boiled down ethics to "don't be a cunt" or words to the effect, or in anything extra-analytical, including his blatantly and deliberately biased History, is in that mode too much to be the comedian to qualify as a philosopher--the respective rankings of both implied here. Goethe's notion that all men, when they're old enough, turn into King Lear isn't far off, and though he was an exception, I still rather enjoy the younger Russel both ways, analytical and comic.

>This board seems to be mostly atheist.
kek you're thinking reddit

*Goethe being the exception, Russell not. I'm typing too fast.

He accumulates nearly every single terrible trend and position that was fashionable at the time.

>Fee-fee ethics parading as clever behind categorization, even worse than Moore

>comical misreading or plain ignorance of 90% of previous philosophers (Nietzsche of course, but also the entire Aristotelian tradition, and Descartes, and Leibniz, and Hume, etc),

>feelgood vaguely "liberal" politics completely ignorant of legal theory

>whiggish views of history (including epistemology) turning to pessimism because of war

>""logical"" "positivism"

>that pathetic showdown of "analytic philosophy" against actual mathematicians, see his controversy with Poincare in particular

>fedoraism that would have made Diderot blush

>his own personal quirks (like the axiom of reducibility, defend this Russelfags)

He is essentially the 20th century John Stuart Mill, and in that sense an important man. A good representative of everything that went wrong during a specific time period.

Last but not least he was a cuck. Yes, this is important when the man tried to make ethical lessons. I mean a next level cuck prepping the bvll and raising his wife's son.

Well, it's tricky because besides throwing off the "yoke" of religion in general and Christianity in particular, it's not clear what the "cause" of atheism is, right? It's clear that in Russell's case, he identifies that cause as somehow hand in hand with the development of science, progressive liberal democratic politics, and enlightenment, but it's not obvious why any of these should be joined together. Atheism can just as well manifest itself as a misanthropy that rejects enlightenment for all and any politics with leveling as a goal (Nietzsche is a great example here).

Leibniz was one the figures in the history of philosophy he truly admired and obsessed over to the extent of in some ways modeling his own work after Leibniz's. He correctly recognizes and acknowledges that Leibniz was a kind of exotericist in writing, conveying his philosophy in accordance with who he was writing to, e.g., using scholastic terminology with scholastics, and Cartesian terminology with Certesians. His book on Leibniz is so good, it's all the more disappointing how poorly he approaches almost every other philosopher in his history.

>advocated for one world government

Into the trash it goes.

>Following my culture's religion makes me smart!

Attached: Christcucks.png (550x543, 49.8K)

>this board is god loving

Attached: 1634403330879.jpg (750x593, 74.2K)

>You tried hard to summon some witty quip and failed miserably.
Now that's some specific projection