My 7 Favorite Philosophers
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 1 มิ.ย. 2024
- Support the channel
► Monthly donation with perks on Patreon: / fictionbeast
► One-time donation on Ko-Fi: ko-fi.com/fictionbeast
WHERE TO FIND ME:
► Instagram: / fiction_philosophy
► E-mail: fictionbeastofficial@gmail.com
► Audio Podcast: redcircle.com/shows/c101a9a1-...
Music:
We Are Here by Declan DP / declandp
Licensing Agreement: declandp.info/music-licensing
Free Download / Stream: bit.ly/_we-are-here
Music promoted by Audio Library • We Are Here - Declan D...
#philosophy
#fictionbeast
#philosophers
![[TH] 2024 PMSL SEA GF D1 | Summer | แข่งที่ไทย ต้องใส่ให้สุด](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Jkuf7nCS7jI/mqdefault.jpg)
Who are some of your influences? Here is my 6 favourite novelists: th-cam.com/video/CZC6PqSc2ME/w-d-xo.html
I’m only a doctor, over 60 years old, and like you, my favorites depends by age. But I recomend a contemporan russian writer: Evghenin Vodolaskin. It is “ a must”!
Schopenhauer has a great effect on, however I'm a skeptic at heart which hardly makes me a philosophy or one that can adhere strictly just to one, so Lao Tzu even though some would argue its more of a religion than just philosophy, one I disagree with, but thinkers and wondrous figures as Abraham Lincoln has one of the greatest qualities and effect me also.
Novels: Laurus and Aviator
Hume, Kirkegaard, Kant, Hesse, Berkeley and Locke and Hobbes, Sartre.
Hume is my ultimate skepticism.
Kirkegaard is my hope and my heart.
Kant is my ideals
Hesse is my struggle
Berkeley and Locke and Hobbes because Hobbes I loathe, Locke's duality is where I start, and Berkeley is somewhere where I end up.
Sartre is my sword against the Hobbes and Neitzsches and the Rands and to preserve my heart.
@@SerifSansSerif Can you share what you mean by your last phrase? I'm genuinely curious how Sartre preserve your heart and is acting like a sword against those people you mentioned...
Nietzsche, Schopenhauer, Dostoevsky, Kierkegaard, Albert Camus, Heidegger and Emil Cioran
The power houses
The existentialists and the pessimists
Always a pleasure to hear you speak. You are very well-read, yet also humble and earnest. Such qualities are quite rare in the humanities/liberal arts today, where prescriptive partisanism flourishes. I commend you, sir.
My favourite philosopher of all time is Nietzsche, as I have always been a Dionysean dreamer, idealist and individualist. I came to study him after becoming disillusioned with how rationality in its extremes was used to justify many horrors in history, from the French Revolution to the Soviet Union. All-too-often, rationality serves to offer justification for repressed or concealed passions and emotions. However, Nietzsche's hyper-individualism is also quite dangerous unless counterbalanced by compassion and humility. Nietzsche infamously heroised some rather nasty people such as Napoleon.
really appreciate it.
schopenhauer. always . his ideas were so profound and influential ,yet people really underestimate by calling him a pessimist . this man single handedly predicted frued theory of subconscious mind and was actually the first person in history to discover the unconscious . and also predicted darwin theory of evolution . so much clear resemblence between both of them . he discovered the most important idea in psychology as well as biology.
I love this channel because it offers me a philosophical overview. Greetings from Brazil.
I would look into the philosophy of Spinoza. Einstein was an admirer. Also, Lao Tzu was probably not an actual person. However, Taoism is a worthwhile philosophy to examine.
what do you mean by lao tzu wasnt an actual person?
@@kiransaggu1625 He can't be verified as having ever really been alive. He was more of a symbolic figurehead.
@@arctos49I mean, we could also say the same thing for Homer right? Yet we do consider him as a "writer".
@@arctos49so I don't think it is wrong to say that Lao Tzu is your favorite philosopher, regarding whether his existence is provable or not...
You don't know how much enlightening you videos are to me. Thanks.....
My philosophy favorites are Dostoyevsky, Camus, Locke, Zizek. Not sure I’ve got much cohesion across them all, but that’s fine.
Dostoevsky wasn't particularly a Philosopher, but you can classify him as such since his works are highly Philosophical. And yes, Albert Camus' Absurdism touches my soul a lot. Though I struggled with his classical book, The myth of Sisyphus, I am proud and elated to have been introduced to his work
A great evaluation!
Thank god i found this channel, there is everything i wanna learn, and also about books.
You are so hardworking and go all out on the topics you talk about rather than bare minimum I am happy that you are getting mostly good views also, although you deserve way more.
This channel would be my replacement from mindless scrolling, and motivation to work hard too.
Keep doing the good work!!!
Love this channel, please never stop making videos
Thank you
I appreciate non-dualist philosophy. Adi Shankara, Simone Weil, Rabindranath Tagore to name a few
what about krishnamurti and acharya rajneesh
I'm attracted to non-dualist thought as well (Kashmir Saivism, a Hindu sect I discuss in a post elsewhere on this page, is a non-dualist school). Shankara is a key figure in Indian philosophy, my main demurral with him being his insistence that the phenomenal world is illusory, and that ultimate reality is transcendent of the realm of matter. This has parallels with Platonic philosophy, where the material world is but a shadow of the world of ideal forms, the true foundation of reality which nonetheless seems unattainable to our direct apprehension and therefore purely speculative. I have the same problem here with the devaluation of the physical universe for a rarefied field of speculation that our physical senses can never perceive and grasp (in my atheist skepticism, I remain a materialist).
@@startrooper3502
A philosopher like Abhinavagupta (flourished at the turn of the eleventh century, the principal synthesizer of Kashmir Saivism) would argue that all IS perfection--there are no errors, no mistakes, no incongruities in the larger scheme of things. Enlightenment would entail the recognition of this perfection. All APARRENT errors and mistakes are merely devices by which we/God can playfully project illusory, relativistic enactments and relationships as part of the divine play ('lila') that is the universe. But All is and ever shall be One, perfectly.
@@startrooper3502
I was going to write the same , then read your message.
When you see atrocity and sufferings in your immediate sorrounding, the perfect larger scheme simply collapses in front of you. Probably God created us and then lost interest in us!
@@gungunidhoop5942 no you aren't understanding the Advaita philosophy. In advaita and all other hindu philosophy, cycle of karma is the key. Actions produce karma and those karma keeps one is bondage. Do good, you will get good, do bad we will get bad. But this is just the transactional level of reality. Here we are different from each other, have suffering, discrimation all of which is bound by the law of karma.
And there is the other level of Absolute truth from which nothing ever existed, nor will anything else ever exist, its just the Brahman and everything that appears is the Brahman with the power of maya. There is no question of discrimination or atrocities when everything is the same.
You are misunderstanding other philoshopies with Advaita. From the absolute, God, you, me, dog, table, chair, the world etc are the same. Brahman is all.
Mine are Thomas Carlyle, Nietzsche, Dostoyevsky, Plato, Marcus Aurelius and Machiavelli.
You are great!
Thank you
Lao Tsu, Miyamoto Musashi, the Buddha, Aristotle and Marcus Aurelius. I also am interested in Nietzsche , Schopenhauer and love Dostoyevsky
I really love David Hume
Dostoevsky 😍😍😍😍😍😍😍😍😍😍😍😍😍😍😍😍😍
I'm one of your new subscribers. I came across your channel because of my love for Dostoevsky and after watching a couple of your videos, I am hooked. I love how you make your summaries, share your insights and interpretations. Also, knowing the life story of the authors and what inspired them to write their masterpiece showed me a new level of appreciation to their works. Please continue to create more content 😊 Kudos to you!
Found your channel a while back. Great content. Keep it up.
Appreciate it!
I'm really enjoying your views dude. Keep it up. :)
Wonderful. I include Marx, Siddhartha Gautama, and Lao Tzu on my list as well. I would also add Simone de Beauvoir and Bell Hooks who helped me realize the influence that patriarchy and racism have on the experiences of humans and women especially. Peter Singer opened my eyes to the philosophy of animals rights. And Anna Freud, Alfred Adler, and Carl Jung are some of my favorite psychological philosophers as well. Great video!
thanks Matt, for this 'storming' through the most important stations of your own search. I want to try to answer your last question of what are (or is) my most relevant philosophy or philosopher. I studied Philosophy for 2 years, then moved to Psychology and from there I moved to Spirituality... well, precisely I was already before those studies on a spiritual path, but my studies only confirmed that philosophy-without-spirituality can't achieve for me, what I was looking for: to find a 'home' in this confusing, ever-changing world, where in the end all we have or think we are, is literally taken away from us... we stop breathing and existing as we know it altogether... I was since my youth fascinated by the question of what comes after death (one of the old Greek philosophers, maybe Plato?, said: a true philosopher must strive for death, as only death can answer the most profound questions about life. He also added, to my relief, that a true philosopher must not take his own life, as the decision on how long I am supposed to be 'here' is for the gods to decide, and not for me)... so thats where I am: what is beyond death? There are a few 'spiritual philosophers' (lets just call them that for the sake of this conversation - I personally see them rather as spiritual teachers, saints and avatars) have crossed my path and hugely influenced me: Paramhansa Yogananda (Autobiography of a Yogi) had the strongest impact on me, but there were many others too, like Sri Aurobindo, Anandamayi Ma, Ramana Maharshi, Sri Nisargadatta - just to name a few, who by the way, all were Indians - also Jesus' teachings touched me deeply and profoundly, and of course Buddha and Lao Tzu (interesting to see, that you eventually also landed with the Indian masters of philosophy and spirituality, if I may say)... so, what is the essence of their teachings for me?: I am a (eternal) soul being; the ego that I thought defines me, is a mere construct by my brain in order to navigate through the material world... in order to achieve peace and serenity (and immortality), I have to go beyond the ego and find the 'observer' (Eckart Tolle and others), which is my true self. How to get there: meditation; becoming still and just listen to what comes up, when I stop my ever-roaming and -raging mind, which's power and domination in this world is the true sickness of humanity... the heart needs to come first, and the mind should be its servant... I stop here... PS. I love to follow your discourses, I find them refreshing, and I'm always open to new encounters and insights on the way... with respect and gratitude xx
This channel is my favourite youtube channel. Thank you for providing deep insights eastern and western philosophy through your work. I can guess how passionate and hard work it requires to make all these videos. Thank you for everything. I am a boy from Nepal, the birthplace of buddha and the land where bajhrayana buddhism and orthodox hinduism is still on practice. I suggest you to explore more on buddha and its lineage with non-dualist concept of hinduism. Thank you.
Thank you! I visited your beautiful country a few years ago. Love the food and people. I got almost attacked by a rhino.
I thank you ❤️
I loved the end cause I very much appreaciate people who knows different things than me be it something very complicated or something very simple but primal/natural.
Tolstoy, Nietzsche, Camus, Spinoza, Marx, Epicurus, Seneca. These are 7 of my most favorite for me. I'm not sure yet who are my 7 favorite, because I'm not so strict in that list. I like also Hume, Wittgenstein, Durkheim, Chomsky, Adorno, Yalom, Benjamin, Weil, Rousseau, Malatesta, Umberto Eco, Κοντογεώργης(Contogeorges is a modern Greek) and the list goes on...
I've only recently gotten into more traditional philosophers. Most of the philosophy that guided my life growing up came from song lyrics.
"But I'm still depressed, and I ask, "What's it worth?"
Ready to give up so I seek the old Earth
Who explained workin' hard may help you maintain
To learn to overcome the heartaches and pain" - Rza, Wu-Tang
"Boredom's not a burden anyone should bear
Constant over stimulation numbs me
But I would not want you any other way" - Maynard, Tool
"Now if a 6 turned out to be 9
I don't mind, I don't mind,
If all the hippies cut off all their hair
I don't care, I don't care
Dig, cause I got my own world to live through" - Jimi Hendrix
"You've thrown the worst fear
That can ever be hurled
Fear to bring children
Into the world" - Bob Dylan
"And then one day you find ten years have got behind you
No one told you when to run, you missed the starting gun" - Roger Waters, Pink Floyd
"How lucky can one guy be
I kissed her and she kissed me" - Dean Martin
Of course, there were authors who got to me early as well:
"I hate to advocate drugs, alcohol, violence, or insanity to anyone, but they've always worked for me." - Hunter Thompson
“I agree that two times two makes four is an excellent thing; but if we are dispensing praise, then two times two makes five is sometimes a most charming little thing as well.” - Fyodor Dostoyevsky
"In the end the Party would announce that two and two made five, and you would have to believe it. It was inevitable that they should make that claim sooner or later: the logic of their position demanded it." - George Orwell
Two things sir, One, Yes I will still leave my thoughts on that video I promised, and two, God, I love you sharing about these philosophers and the space it produces, and especially for your thoughts.
(Also, I didn't know you had a Podcast, have you been keeping that a secret from me!)
Zhuangzi is perhaps my favourite, he carried forward the ideas of Lao Tzu but has a greater use/ability with language and poetry, imagination, and perhaps even the ideas too that are contained in taoist thought, I recommend him to anyone, as well as many on your channel including... . Nietzsche, Schopenhauer, Dostoevsky, Orwell, kierkegaard, Heidegger. And Diogenes the cynic, who I interpret not as cynical of existence and the meaning of ones life, but of the trappings of society.
And just one of many great poets I could mention, Hafiz. There are many from East and west. Emily Dickinson a great American poet, singular in her genius, to me anyway, in the way Shakespeare is, but more introspective.
Thankyou for your good, and great work at bringing together ideas.
Thank you for the video as always. A quick comment: I think Buddhism is more about changing your PERSPECTIVE than changing yourself. This perspective, or view, is so important in some of the teachings I have heard. Hope this adds to the discussion.
You made a good point.
Not a fan of Foucault at all. Him, Sartre, and Derrida along with a bunch of other French "intellectuals" signed a petition in the late 70s for the French government to lower the age of consent to 12.
As for my own tastes; Seneca, St Thomas Aquinas, Epictetus, Dostoyevsky, Burke, Scruton, most of the Church Fathers, Kierkegaard, Pascal, and if you want to count him, CS Lewis. I still have a lot of philosophy that I want to read. I'd like to get my hands on some Descartes and Wittgenstein.
6:14pm, I love this tidy storytelling as a journey, historically biographical..I'm impressed.
By far my favorite is Kant. Like me Kant kept his leggings up by the use of small springs inside little boxes. MarkMannM2
Still got a lot more to read but thus far I would say: Nietzsche, Marcus Aurelius/ just stoic thought in general, Aristotle and Heraclitus
Lovely video. I started with Hume and vague Buddhist philosophy and Plato, probably a little bit of Ayn Rand. Then Camus. I tried to get into Schopenhauer, but I think some of his concrete conclusions are not very compatible with current medical knowledge, at least as far as I know. I am in absolute awe of Kant. I don't know if I actually "believe" his conclusions, I just love his arguments. I don't know if I want to live by a certain philosophy anymore (like I did with Camus). I think I'll just appreciate the arguments from afar.
I’m reading Camus now.
@@Fiction_Beast Be careful 😉
@@Fiction_Beast me too
I love Hume
My own journey started with Thoreau and Emerson when I was a teenager (the 1970's). Then I discovered Schopenhauer and Nietzsche (in that order). I have since written a lengthy philosophical biography blog on Nietzsche. Habermas came later and I was impressed by his insistence that "communicative competence" means participation in dialog as *willing to engage with the other's perspective*. I think Habermas is the world's greatest living philosopher. I spent six months in India in the mid-1980's (mostly studying yoga) and became interested in eastern approaches. Finally, I came upon Heidegger. I can't understand him very well but I enjoy his essays, particularly with respect to technology and Being. Since 1993, I have lived in nature and today I consider myself an accidental Taoist. So it is refreshing to see how much of your journey lines up with my own. Nietzsche and Lao Tzu is a strange mix for sure. Works for me though.
I love your comment. It feel good to find people who have similar journeys. Thank you for sharing.
Heidegger’s lectures are more accessible and in print.
👌 thanks.
I really like philosophers like Oswald Spengler, Nietzsche, Schopenhauer, Ludwig Klages all you can call it Philosophy of Live and I like Hegel also. I admirer also phänomenology like Husserl and Heidegger and I like analytical philosophy like Wittgenstein and also postmodernism like Derrida and Foucault. I like also existenzialism like Albert Camus and Max Stirner and Mythology like Joseph Campbell. Also I´m very much admirer the ancient stoics. I like also Ernst Juenger und the political philosophy of Carl Schmitt or the russian thinker Alexander Dugin. And I like the Traditionalists like Rene Guenon or Julius Evola. And I like the works of Houston Steward Chamberlain, Christopher Stedde, Alfred Bäumler and Ernst Krieck and Giovanni Gentile and also the spanish thinker Jose Antonio Rivera and the german philosopher Alfred Rosenberg.
Man, who are these people!
I only know about three of every name you mentioned
Plato , Aristotle , Hume, Kant , Shaupenhauer , Nietzshe , Benatar
As an Orthodox Christian, I don’t really ascribe to Marxism and I don’t care about his economics in any capacity. But man, his attempt to write a philosophy of history from a materialist perspective is nothing short of a philosophical accomplishment.
I would recommend Saint Maximos the Confessor, my favourite theologian.
Marxism is the last Christian heresis
As an orthodox Christian, I don't care about churches' misconceptions. Christ would admire Marx's works. Both were great revolutionists. And nobody by a scientific point of view can dispute about the greatness of the economic works of Marx. How can you define a man as a philosopher without being even at least a materialist? You can't prove any scientific or philosophical point without being even at least a materialist. You can't take the position of every orthodox Christian. You just can't deputize the whole orthodox community just by saying that you are one. If you really are, then you know that most of the priests were with the Communists during the Greek Civil War
If there is one philosopher absent from your mention who I recommend above all others, it’s Wittgenstein. Camus, Confucius, and Epictetus are my other stand-out favorites. Your views align very much with my own, so I’m sure they will not disappoint you.
Out of the existentialist I like Soren Kierkegaard. The other stuff not so much, but to each their own.
Typically if you’re Christian, he’s your man. If you’re an atheist or agnostic you have more choices lol.
@@Damascene749 Kirkegaard is the most joyful of them though. And honestly, he's ok with you not being Christian as long as you believe (have faith)in something, preferrably irrational, the more irrational the better. Even if you get the "god" wrong, the most important thing is to foster a relationship with whatever it is. In a way it could be a faith and trust and hope in humanity itself.
In some ways, there's a lot more love in his take because of that and that's probably why it's the most joyful... Which is both appropriate and horribly wrong for a dour and depressed Dane. ;)
Same. :)
I have an interest to all Existentialist thinker that I could find, yet my favorite is still the grand daddy of them all, Kierkegaard :))
I like the economic opposite of Marx his name is Ludwig von Mises he wrote a economics book called human action
Franz fano is one of my most favourite ❤❤❤
Very informative video @fictionbeast aka literaturebeast !
Thank you!
I went through the whole three phases you just mentioned from the age of 14 to my current age 18 studying philosophers only lightly 🗿
I am more fond of the eastern philosophy. Because, I believe that everything is a lot like smooth that the more we try to control and resist the more we exhaust ourselves. It's like swimming ;the more we try to grab hold of the water the more we sink. However, when we realize that we are only part of nature; we accept and respect its laws, life becomes easier.
I love the swimming metaphor.
He did mention it before that eastern philosophy focuses more on the acceptance of fate than that of the west
Schopenhauer is very easy to read and reread imo, he’s also very flatly relatable - I can see why everyone after him tried to upgrade his ideas.
I love your channel and content. One of my favs. Just one issue - is there any way you could drop the background music? It's very distracting and annoying. Sorry for the criticism. I'm wondering if anyone else feels this way, or is it just me. Thanks.
Thanks for the feedback.
I feel the same way. Although the music is beautiful, it is distracting and philosophy needs my full concentration.
Nice video Matt. I abandoned the teachings of other people about a decade ago. Before them, many phases. Rationalism, Satanism, Mysticism, many psychologies as philosophies such as Psychosynthesis and Transpersonal, various Indigenous Philosophies, Non Duality, Shamanism, Daoism, Buddhism for 15 years, Dadaji, Stoicism, on and on. When I understood the aspect of the seeking mind, philosophy no longer seemed important.
Can you elaborate on "abandoned the teachings of other people [...]"? That phrase may be understood as not seeing utility in other people's work, but I'm guessing that is not the case.
One person alone could live a very simple life.
A small hut and a piece of garden, with knowledges to enjoy the natural world.
To be a thinker or practice yoga or Zen.
But for a yong person with a family. It's a different story, live is to make a living.
Went to a Habermas guest lecture at UCL about 20 years ago.
Studied Russian thought at the time, but Habermas was impenetrable.
German philosophers do not make it easy for the reader as they tend to make things more abstract. Habermas is no different. Heidegger is another difficult philosopher.
Albert Camus, his work has saved me at the lowest point where I want to commit suicide due to trauma
He's the reason I discovered this channel I've been reading The Myth of Sisyphus everyday for 5 months now.
Another good video.
If Lao Tzu and The Buddha interest you look into Dogen and Nagarjuna if you haven’t already.
The seven philosophers together in a group makes me think of my favorite philosophers as members of a band or a D&D party. Each one has something to contribute.
That's an interesting way to put it. Yes, they all have shaped me in some way, but also many others.
Can you please talk about how you got out that Holden phase , I'm stuck in it and it feels very bad
Find something to do. Something useful for yourself or others. Life at its core is simple. You have a limited time on earth and make the most of it. Feel free to contact me if you need to talk to someone.
I recommend Wittgenstein if you want to learn more about philosophy of language.
You should read Alasdair Macintyre
I think I was introduced to his philosophy in university. Is he Canadian? I belive he saw humans in terms of community of something. It's been a while.
@@Fiction_Beast Scottish
@13:20 To answer your question: Who Are Your Favorite Philosophers And Why?
My favorite philosopher is me - I've studied Philosophy since I was an undergrad - tonight I realized, I'm the best philosopher.
Thank you for asking - now I'm writing a book to explain it
The 1:18 picture somes up one of the problems I have with Marxism, it's entirely based on what is currently happening instead of what could happen. So it's solutions are basically "anything that works".
Asked and answered
Which U.K. university would be the best to study philosophy, in your opinion? Thanks 😊
The first name that comes to mind is Warwick. Also LSE is another good place. I assume oxford and Cambridge are always given.
I like free will fine-tuned by higher good.
I'm more of Eastern philosophy kind of guy but you know it's more of a religion than a actual kind of philosophy of living (whether you take it to make you understand the world around you through their observations or not)
I was expecting to find Henri Bergson in there based on these ones.
Terence mckenna, Alan watts, aldous huxley & Ram das
I think some of your comments were thoughtful, but other points sounded quite short-sighted. I also don't get why you didn't qualify your summations of Nietzsche et al with your own thoughts, i.e., if you agree with Nietzsche on his so called love of hierarchy (by the way I should recommend Jonas Ceika's book synthesising Marx & Nietzsche, it sounds like you could do with reading it).
Good question. I believe hierarchy is very natural way of existing which we have done since the dawn of time. But of course there should be equal opportunity for everyone but in reality it rarely happens because we are born different. Tall short ugly beautiful strong weak so nature is inherently unequal. Human equality is possible with a lot pressure and social engineering but it comes at a cost. For me Nietzsche represents someone who put art, beauty, creativity above all else. It’s a position of privilege so talking about Nietzsche to someone starving has no meaning. His audience was a small minority of artists philosophers writers and so on.
If you want a new favourite, i can answer everything in metaphysics for you.
Didn’t you upload this on your second channel brother?
shush! :) i think it helps people know a bit about my philosophical stance
You’re breaking the first rule of philosophy club 🤫
@@gracefitzgerald2227 sorry my mistake…what 2nd channel? 🤫😉
@@Fiction_Beast lol my bad I’ll keep quiet 🤐😁
@@Saber23 😀😝
Kong Qiu, Schopenhauer, Dostoyevsky, Rousseau, Jacques Derrida, and Jeremy Bentham influenced me most.
Favorite philosophers from this side include: Gurdjieff, Thoreau, Emerson, Lao Tsu, Daumal, and Rousseau. Bukowski's quotes are great.
Well done, my favorites are similar to yours.
Except I don't know much habermas. And that's because I refuse to engage with poor written communication. Habermas has a PhD, so he must communicate clearly. Instead he and the Continentals engage in an undecipherable polysyllabic cacaphony of words. And the words and phrases can mean whatever the reader wants them to.
Compare that to Nietzsche, Schopenhauer, Buddha, lao tzu. They write clearly, and we can understand their ideas. And their ideas are life-changing.
Habermas was forced on me.
@@Fiction_Beast Nietzsche and Schopenhauer are continental philosophers.
thanks! Surprisingly no Greek and Roman philosophers have inspired you! I also love the ideas of Heraclitus, Socrates, Plato, Epicurus, Seneca, Cicero Micheal de Montague , Spinoza and some modern philosophers ...and others....
Perhaps Plato resonates with me most.
@@Fiction_Beast thanks! Plotinus is also great!
Arthur Schopenhauer is my favourite
Plato, Aristotle, Nietzche, Kant, Spinoza, David Hume, Leibniz
Hi it’s crazy but if you read Christian scriptures in the writings of Paul and James and Peter a lot of self discipline and not resisting government and not returning evil is emphasised just like Buddhist and Taoist teachings
13:03 one doesnt have to come at the expense of the other
Diogenes!
but how could Foucault groom children when the father stands in his way😂
I'm not quite familiar what you're saying. I know he was openly gay.
@@Fiction_Beast in the 70s the French post-modernists petitioned for legalization of sexual relatios with children. Foucault was one of them so was Sartre and Beauvior
@Of the Refrain Foucault explicitly defended pedophilia in his writings. Indisputable.
Dostoevsky, Camus, Cioran, Satre, Nietzsche
Nietzche is my first philosopher i am going through, Ofcourse from thus spoke zarathustra, i love the poetic writing that reminds me to khalil gibran which i read alot from my childhood, my philosophical journey is about commitment life-time study.
i hope this channel also covers some of khalil gibran works someday :')))))
I appreciate books of Osho,Neal Donald,Bronte and others
I think we should all strive to make our own self our favourite philosopher. After all, none of the philosophers of the past have discovered definitive answers to life's big questions. And yes we do have a self, and it is composed of all our past experience attached to our present body, and for what it's worth, while there is much of worth in Buddhism, the insistence that life is suffering, and that incarnation is something to be avoided is IMO highly misguided. I would argue that life is the greatest privilege, even though it always ends badly - As Camden Benares writes in Zen Without Zen Masters "the cost of living is only paid once, and never in advance!" The converse to this is Andrew Marvell's "The grave's a fine and private place, But none, I think, do there embrace. " Our Mission, should we choose to accept it, is to live in an enlightened manner, not to be dead in one.
If you have nothing that you really want in your life, spend lots of time tripping about it. The more you trip the more ideas will pop up the more creative your gonna start to get. Your subconscious mind doesn't care if your vision is trippy. It doesnt care if you dont know how to do it.
When you see a thing clearly in your mind, your creative "trip mechanism" within you takes over and does the job much better than you could do it by conscious effort or willpower.
A different psychedelic from a different planet every nanosecond.
All sorts of dreams are possible.
The human nervous system cannot tell the difference between an "actual" experience and an experience imagined vividly and in detail.
Synthesize "experience," to literally create experience, and trip it, in the laboratory of our minds.
A vision is a very trippy image, the most trippy image that you can come up with for yourself at this time. This vision will become like a hallucination in other peoples mind and this could be the cause of them creating extraordinary things. .
My favorite, desert island philosophers are Montaigne, Nietzsche, Kierkegaard, Thoreau, Democritus, Marcus Aurelius, the Stoics, and David Hume. Albert Camus is good for a laugh, too.
Hahaha Albert Camus for a laugh?
That man was good!
My favorite philosopher is the Norwegian human ecologist Terje Bongard.
I haven’t heard of him
@@Fiction_Beast Nobody wanted to translate his book into English. Anyway he's the best. The second best is in my opinion the Norwegian eco-philosopher Sigmund Kvaløy Sætreng, and I actually think some Canadians translated his work into English. My father had his father as teacher in elementary school.
Very insightful presentation. Of the thinkers cited, I suspect Marx is the one whose legacy comes closest to being discredited today, with his ideas put into action in many polities in the twentieth century, to frankly disastrous result. His recognition of class and the abiding circumstances that feed class struggle remain pertinent, but his prescriptive expectation of historical fulfillment is overly deterministic, and seems as fanciful as any eschatology of the Abrahamic faiths that Marxists typically disavow.
I think you're spot on to call Nietzsche more an artist than a philosopher, given his tendency for sweeping, grandiloquent pronouncements that are not arrived at through rigorous analysis. His passion excites and inspires, but any rational foundation to his positions is dubious, consistent of course with his ambivalence towards rationalism. And the man's contempt for the weak, vulnerable, and exploited is thoroughly noxious, enough to turn one away from his work, which would be unfortunate given its literary merit and seminal influence.
I am touched by Buddhist compassion, but dislike the religion's disdain for material comfort and pleasure. I believe we are material beings, and material satisfaction is a legitimate pursuit, as long as it is held in balance with acknowledgement of its limitations (money, for example, cannot buy happiness, but it can certainly stave off or ameliorate physical suffering or want). But there is certainly wisdom in recognizing that any change in the world must begin with inner transformation. We must heal ourselves before we can ever presume to truly advance positive change in the world around us.
I find Daoism appealing in its call for harmony with nature and the world as it is. I think there is much contentment to be gained from this approach, though one risks complacency if one were never to seek to emend dissatisfactory or unjust elements in one's life. But the appeal to living in balance with nature (and of course we ourselves are part of nature) is very compelling in this present moment of increasing environmental degradation.
Of philosophers I admire, I can name off the top of my head, for different reasons, Plato, for his literary genius, though I don't like the devaluation of the physical world that is enshrined in his thought, so foundational to the Western tradition, and of course, embedded in Plato's texts, the figure of Socrates, for his commitment to truth and the authentic articulation and presentation of the self. If we can indulge the mention of Michel de Montaigne as philosopher, I also highly value his example of self-development and recognition, anticipating in its positive iteration the confessional culture that so typifies our current society.
Among religious thinkers, this atheist is most impressed with Abhinavagupta, an Indian thinker living at the turn of the eleventh century, whose synthesis of various strands of Saivism then competing or converging in the kingdom of Kashmir (hence the modern appellation of this movement as "Kashmir Saivism") remains a phenomenal intellectual achievement, and whose position on the nature of reality stands as the most world-affirming among the religious traditions I have encountered. Kashmir Saivism basically held that the individual self is identical with God (identified in the tradition with the Hindu deity Siva, and whose primary attribute is a Divine Consciousness at once transcendent and immanent), and that enlightenment and liberation consisted of the recognition and direct experience of this reality. This breakthrough could be accomplished through focused ritual that would shock or surprise the practitioner into awareness, or any number of experiences that would awaken the adept to recognition, which was promised to be blissful and transformative. Both ritual and more mundane experience could and usually did involve a strongly aesthetic component, such as music or the contemplation of art or literature, or even convivial enjoyment with family and friends. God was likened to an artist, with the phenomenal world God's field of artistic creation, real and palpable, so high value was placed on the practitioner pursuing aesthetic experience, either as creative agent or receptive connoisseur, and aesthetic pleasure was understood to be highly anticipatory of spiritual enlightenment. With such enlightenment, the adept would understand not only that she herself is God, but that everyone and everything is likewise God, and there is nothing that is not holy. This very life is bliss given the proper perspective. I know of no other religious path that so affirms the worth and dignity of the material world and our presence in it.
Thank you for your thoughtful comment. Just to respond to your Marx bit. I sometimes think Marx should have set up a franchise like Macdonald’s. That way it would have harder to do things in his name or different brands all called Marxism. Also I think fundamentally Marx underestimated the animalistic side of human nature as well as artistic side.
I think you will be interested in Bernardo Kastrup and his doctoral thesis Analytic idealism...i hope you will check it out.
Also the books i recommend of him are "The Idea Of The World" and "Science Ideated".
His language is precise, coherent and therefore offers great clarity.
@@mrcollector4311
Thank you for the recommendations! I have considerable intellectual respect for idealistic philosophies (which includes both Platonism and Kashmir Saivism), and am amenable to exploring other schools of thought so oriented.
philosophies like those of Marx and Nietzsche have myth and metaphor at their core. Through the ossification of language and literary style, the metaphors lose much of their colour and shape, becoming nearly transparent and formless, so much so that many don't recognise them, and think that the philosophies have a transcendent claim to reality.
People still 'fall' for the metaphors though, regardless of how grey they become. All the words in the world can't hold back the intuitive appeal of the metaphor. Nietzsche's Superman, Marx's breaker of chains, Camus' Sisyphus: these are what people are drawn to, not the words and intellectual convolutions.
I sometimes think it's absurd that someone would call themselves an "Absurdist" after becoming a little familiar with Camus. But then again, a lot of people called themselves "Marxist" too, without even reading the Communist Manifesto, let alone other Marxist works. They are in love with a story and the clothing that such philosophical myths bring to the ego and its relationship to other egos. Camus gives me the self-narrative of heroic struggle, Marx's the self-righteous fraternity overcoming the 'oppressors', Nietzsche replaces my low self-esteem with a conceited looking-down on others (as commonly practised, though not what Nietzsche would proclaim), and so forth.
Some like Plato and Nietzsche have revealed their myths, but many people seem to read the Allegory of the Cave and Zarathustra, respectively, as just an artistic expression of the philosophy, rather than the myths underlying the philosophy itself.
With time, some ideological myths are sharpened, made explicit and the ideology or philosophy thrown out. Usually politics motivates this. The old myths tend to be replaced with new myths though. For example, the Humanist myth of progress replaced the Church- State's 'Great Chain of Being' -- this was the biggest meme of Western history!
Only now are some people seriously questioning the Humanist 'progress' myth in light of environmental destruction/Climate Change.
For some, it will always be too soon to see the myths and metaphors that are the foundations of all philosophies, ideologies and religion. Naive belief in a fatherly creator 'up there' is still going strong.
Blowing some smoke: Your viewers are probably among the few that may be able to see the myths behind philosophies due to how you present fiction and philosophy on par in terms of meaningfulness.
Btw, I am not a Postmodernist, as seeing philosophy as just a form of literature for the pretentious literary criticism of privileged academics robs it of its applied context. Also, I'm not a closet Marxist like most Pomos.
At the end of the day, this exercise teaches us that, in many cases, looking trippy in public isn’t as bad as we believe. Sure, we might get some looks and giggles, but these don’t hurt, now do they? The Cynic philosopher Diogenes of Sinope used to sleep in a barrel on the streets, walking around in ragged clothes, ‘pleasured’ himself in public, and tripped balls with people who walked past him. He fucked what people thought of him. Therefore, no one was able to hurt him.
Schopenhauer for the win!
It will own you
1:44 that would mean you've insulated yourself from the reality we live in. Pretty sure he talks about how it's impossible to properly critique capitalism as you're buying into it. Or others do in criques of progressiveism.
Highly recommend exploring this as your bias is quite glaring when you mention anything communist. Most notably your interpretation of Camus path. I disagree.
Interesting enough, I was an existentialist before I was a communist. And I still don't think I read enough to call myself one.
I also come from privilege and have rejected it in my adult life. Or took the road less traveled by, and that has made all the difference.
I also think content creation and the commodification of philosophy is negatively impacting you're ability to understand it. Ego for one. And the algorithm for another.
Thank you for your perspective, it's reinforcing my path. Keeping art separate from money. Well content wise. I already get paid for one of my arts, carpentry.
Eventually I'll probably make video essays.
I think the goal of philosophy is to ask the right questions rather than to find answers which in my opinion are a little more personal. I would say that the philosophers who ask the best questions are:
- Blaise Pascal
- Platon
- Nietzsche
- Rousseau
- Schopenhauer
- Kant
- Bentham
- Spinoza
I would said Dostoievski but he isn't a philosophe
That’s a great point. I also like your list.
Bentham's utilitarism is at best a deceptive tool used by productivism-consumerism-driven capitalists. Pascal in his Toughts has 34 chapters, 28 of them on the lines of God is everything, Christ is ultimate truth, which leaves us with merely six valuable chapters. Plati is merely the Socrate's scribe, intrinsically he has no value, he was a boxer by his trade after all, and his works only made it to our times because the X-ians foundthat they suited well with their own doxa.
6:27 7:22
Why philosophers always act and sit like that ?
they know people will ask this question
Interesting question. I guess it was a photo pose back then.
😂
It's technically not them being French that makes them sexy.
Interesting how Buddha tells us to kill the Self. There's also an Islamic saying by the Prophet Muhammad which he says: "The greatest war, is the war against the Self."
Buddha doesn't say that. Buddha says there IS no self. Not to kill the self.
Very thought provoking. By the bye, "Tao" is pronounced "Dao." I like your work.
Why no one mention Carl Jung
I mention for him 🙌
Can you explain how Nietzshce was more of an artist than philosopher??
I meant his style of writing is more poetic, polemic, and less structured like a typical philosopher’s writing. A good counter example would be Kant who was extremely structured and regimented in his writing.
Osho
Why not Albert Camus?
I consider him a novelist.
Novelist, and... Philosopher
Wikipedia : Philosopher, Writer, Journalist
there is one big daddy not mentioned....... evolution
It's given.