Who are some philosophers that changed your perspective?

Who are some philosophers that changed your perspective?

Pic related. This motherfucker got me to believe in Christ again.

Uncle Ted

...

"No man, no problem"

Joe Rogan, bro

>believing in god
>good philosophy

only on Sup Forums could you read something as stupid as this...

also he was way ugly, that pic is clearly fake

>Who are some philosophers that changed your perspective?

>Kant
>believe in Christ
wait, wasn't his stand on religion in general and christianity especially
a reduction of it to its ethics alone and getting rid of the mysticism and supernatural powers

...

He maintained that we can't know about God, so its possible that such a being might exist, and he had faith on that

I admire this guys stern conviction for universal maxims, and his value for the golden rule. However, I myself cannot admit to being an absolutist as well. Individual situations need to be handled with wisdom like that of King Solomon

so he was an agnostic atheist, would be pretty surprised if the smartest man since Aristotle was a religious nut

Well, and this motherfucker made me believe, there´s a very strong possibility that Christ was a fucking scam artist, because the mere existence of miracles is ridiculous.

Friedrich Nietzsche. Has pulled me out of nihilism and depression.

>believing in Christ
is literally anything more pathetic?

that's ironic now ain't it

iam everything that ive read

A jew on a stick... Oh.... Fuck... That explains everything!

...

agreed, but christ is all about the personification of god on earth
so i can't see how agreeing with kant's work could possibly strengthen your believe in christ

...

Nietzsche is such a fucking overhyped piece of esoteric bullshit and comes right after the great Marc Aurel.

literally the only philosopher that matters

Not so much although that is subjective.

Ok

skydas detected

That smug bastard. I like him.

rekindled my broken faith in socialism

Hello. Now go to bed.

have you read Kant's commentary on the Bible? He's a lutheran, you know

by killing 70 million of his own people, I assume?

Yes. Genocide tends to help the economy. Less mouths to feed and all.
Mao realised the overpopulation issue and resolved it. Truly a saint.

You don't know how the genocide happened in China do you?

>wao maidong
>having philosophical ideas
He was anti-intellectual as fuck.

"No woman, no cry"

Aquinas

Please turn down your autism. I was being sarcastic.

...

Schopenhauer:
>Kant's teaching produces a fundamental change in every mind that has grasped it. This change is so great that it may be regarded as an intellectual rebirth. It alone is capable of really removing the inborn realism which arises from the original disposition of the intellect. ... In consequence of this, the mind undergoes a fundamental undeceiving, and thereafter looks at all things in another light. But only in this way does a man become susceptible to the more positive explanations that I have to give. ... My line of thought, different as its content is from the Kantian, is completely under its influence, and necessarily presupposes and starts from it.

>He who has not mastered the Kantian philosophy, whatever else he may have studied, is, as it were, in a state of innocence; that is to say, he remains in the grasp of that natural and childish realism in which we are all born, and which fits us for everything possible, with the single exception of philosophy. Such a man then stands to the man who knows the Kantian philosophy as a minor to a man of full age.

>Immanuel Kunt
You're dumb and so is he.

That's literally how you should view religion. It strengthens my belief in Christ, but that's a long, serious conversation not suited for an East India Missile Trading Company message board.

"No nigger, no crowded prisons"

Fred Rogers.

so you're not thinking for yourself anymore. good.

>muh spooks

Ah I guess because it wasn't funny I missed your hilarious gaffe, you just sound fucking retarded to anyone who knows history.

Worst /lit/ meme senpai

>Yes, I legitimately considered genocide as a good thing. Totally. 100% not kidding.
You don't need to know jack shit about history to know I was fucking joking.

finally someone with good taste
and hes burger
but still, good choice bro!

so you said christ but meant christian ethics (e.g. the golden rule)
and not the belief in the person of jesus as their lord and savior as most of today's christians do?

...

Then you didn't understand him lmfao

>still doesn't get it
you still don't get it. low iq fuck wit.

Sieg Heil

His shit eating grin is legendary

No, I believe in Jesus as the Lord and Savior.

causality is ridiculous under Hume's view tbqh

>genocide being genocide regardless of the method.
Calm down you autistic cunt.

Oh sorry, just realized you are not OP
I assume you were not led to your believes by reading kant?
so my reply was worded for the wrong person

>still doesn't understand
you're a retard.

my nigga diogenes

William Lane Craig

He willingly decided to starve others as he saw it as being beneficial for others.
It's genocide regardless.

No western philosopher I've ever read really "gets it." Read up on Buddhism and Daoism. See the world as it truly is. Kant almost had it, so did Epictetus. Dionysius was very close, but the Buddha figured it out and did it way before Christ. Rethink your philosophy.

>influenced by kant
alright, I laughed and I replied. Fine bait.

No. Nietschz was not a nihilist

Hume critic on wonders has nothing to do whatsoever with causality. It´s all about testimony and the quality/character/etc. of that testimony.

That's fine, but it's the same conclusion. Christ is Christian and therefore Western ethics. Christianity is an advancement in the evolution of Western Philosophy. It follows a long line going back long before the Egyptians.

The Gospel is Philosophy.

>arguing a point i'm not even debating
you literally are an intellectual amoeba

Oh do enlighten me intellectual arbiter.

evola
hobbes
fpbp

Get on my level.

>I'm too stupid to learn on my own please spell it out for me

Everyone in this thread that says Kant sucks and doesn't post one of their own is a faggot

People are shit, the world is shit and the only way to maintain everyone's level of fuckery is to have someone that is so invested with self perseverance that he rules them all to keep the chain moving.

Dostoevskiy, Shopenhauer, Nietzshe

>getting this autistically butthurt over a fucking joke
Yeah I think we're just wasting eachothers time m8.

Hobbes is also my favourite philosopher.

so having established that you are a believer in jesus christ
what is your opinion on Kant limiting religion to the boundaries of bare reason?

I'd also like to add Shakespeare to this list.

brief list of Philosophers that don't suck as hard as Kant does, of the top of user's head:
>Cioran
>Nietzsche
>Kierkegaard
> Wittgenstein
>Searle
>Harbison

Do I pass your stupid litmus test for being allowed to dislike Kant now?

...

You may not like it, but this is what peak philosophy looks like.

>If the upshot of Berlin's value-pluralism is to undermine the idea of a rational morality, the effect of his work on nationalism is to jettison the prospect that a time may come when men's dominant allegiance is to the norms of a universal civilization

>[...]

>If, as Vico, Herder and Berlin maintain, we are a highly inventive species whose forms of life are radically underdetermined by our common humanity, what reason is there to share the hopes of the Enlightenment for an eventual convergence of liberal and humanistic values? Why not expect, instead, endemic conflict among human beings, as they constitute themselves into distinct and incommensurable cultures, each committed to its identity, and not all animated by anything resembling liberal values? Do not recent developments in the Soviet Union, and in the beleaguered state of Israel, suggest that this latter prospect is all too likely?

He does this because he knows that there is no logical way to prove his existence and vice versa. I choose to believe because I see the benefit of doing so. Atheism has a much logical merit as theism.
You criticize Kant but dont offer any substantial objection or philosopher you consider inspirational. All I wanted was to have a a nice discussion but faggots like you feel the need to shove their sense of intellectual superiority down peoples throats.

>so having established that you are a believer in jesus christ
>what is your opinion on Kant limiting religion to the boundaries of bare reason?

I am of the personal belief that that is what Christ's intention was as well. And I also realize that there are many churches in previous centuries who would have me burned at the stake for saying so.

I believe that just as science goes through its process of refinement and discovery, so does religion and philosophy. Christianity, at least, to my eyes heretofore, is the philosophy of existence, the philosophy of the soul at its most base/bare and fundamental level. And that this even mere concept of Christianity is still, 2000 years later, yet to be fully realized. And that, in time, it will, whether it is based on Christ's teachings or another comes along to further refine it and teach it better Himself.

And before you say it, I don't believe that will contradict Him as the Christ. For through Him all will be revealed and He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead.

Don't read that literal. Read it like a poem. A poem passed on to you through time. The long line of wisdom through time.

How will political rationalists ever recover?

This king.

Honestly it was some fag on Sup Forums that did more than anything else for me, rather than a god watching and judging what if God is just the collective hivemind of humanity from the beginning of time to the end he is the moral compassion within us all that allows us to have a civilized society

Soren Kierkegaard. Great Christian philosopher. Motherfucker is hardcore.

Kant is great as other anons have pointed out. Has his own vocabulary that makes first read throughs difficult.

One of my favorites is Spinoza though. I enjoy his Mind-Body Problem ideas.

...

Fine rhetoric, user, but you began here by shoving your own down the throats of everyone who is here saying "Kant's not that cool, yo."

Perhaps start that discourse instead of acting like the people you apparently dislike at the outset?

Here's a tiddly bit from Kierkegaard that I think sums up the core of Kant as properly as should be done:
>To have faith is to lose your mind and to win God.

The vast depth of Kant's corpus is essentially just expounding on the Golden Rule in the style of the times, which is fine but I think most philosophers since Kant and his sycophants like Schopenhauer are interested in more complex questions. The Categorical Imperative is like a pendant keychain you can buy for a dollar in any truckstop out in the flyover states of the United States of Epistemology.

Basically reading Kant is like standing in a corner with your forehead on the wall.

Honestly, Nietzsche. But I grew out of philosophy as soon as my dissertation was done

Honestly if I had to choose between allying with Christians or SJWs it'd be a tough choice.

Also I don't know the conversation going on in your top reply, but the way you're responding is literally Camus's leap of faith, which even he says is a detestable position to occupy. This is a guy who is so pants-on-head that he makes appeals to beauty while saying anyone who makes appeals is a dolt.

Carl Schmitt
Juan Donoso Cortes
Tocqueville

and one polish priest that disparages lutheranism and german philosophy

You really do feel the need to insult me instead of just making your point. Also, wittling down Kant's moral philosophy down to the golden rule is insane. Your point of me taking a leap of faith is fair if I'm being honest. Doesn't make it any less insane than atheism.

Not all, Nietzsche was not a nihilistic. That's why he stressed for you to create your own values. The death of god destroyed the philosophical foundation of the West, leaving a black hole of nihilism, but you can escape if you create your own values. This is what Nietzsche meant by the Ubermensch, a man that will create his own values, though people on Sup Forums interpet that idea as some master race bullshit.

Rationalists scarcely have, I think. This passage is great, thanks for posting user. Somehow have not read this lad. Might I trade you Emile Cioran's The Temptation to Exist. Have fun in there.

Aurelius is a meme. He wrote one of the greatest books ever written, but he's still a meme. Read Nietzsche after reading Aurelius if you really want to understand Aurelius. Nietzsche had very interesting commentary on stoic thinking.