“Every miserable fool who has nothing at all of which he can be proud, adopts as a last resource pride in the nation to which he belongs; he is ready and happy to defend all its faults and follies tooth and nail, thus reimbursing himself for his own inferiority.”
Damn. What did he mean by this?
Probably that he's too dumb to realize that you can have pride not only in the things you create but also the things which created you, and there's nothing wrong with that
>Schopenhauer
>dumb
Are you too dumb to read books?
its not about my dirt is better than your dirt
if you stop being house proud,your house becomes a shithole
i believe western civilizaiton is the pinnicle of mankind,and people have forgotten that
not only have they forgotten but there are some whom seek to destroy it
i love my country for what it gives me and to the world
only blue pilled libcucks who hate themselves cannot see it
they focus on the bad but ignore the good.
its a sad day when flying your flag with pride is considered backward and stupid.
in that sense he absolutely was too dumb to realize that you can have pride not only in the things you create but also the things which created you, and there's nothing wrong with that
First post, best post
But you're too dumb to be an immensely influential philosopher, dumb fuck
No one is infallible
Not you, not me, not the wisest man or the dimmest idiot
No doubt, but he's not "too dumb" to realize something, he lived in a time when Europeans were constantly slaughtering each other for a few miles of clay
The poster you're talking with seems smarter than you, your mindless appeals to authority are a type of logical fallacy hehe you have no substance! you have no content!
It's not necessarily stupidity that Schopenhauer was experiencing, but sadness due to his isolation.
When you are smarter than everyone else you are necessarily isolated. With this isolation comes loneliness, and resentment. That's what Schopenhauer is communicating here.
It's kind of like admitting the hard truth (taking the red pill). This difficult admission immediately isolates you from the dumb blue-pilled boobs who are taught to believe that blacks are wonderful high IQ geniuses who are attacked daily by diabolical whites.
Schopenhauer was communicating resentment. It just happened to fall on "nationalists" that day.
Butthurt.
Just because it's old doesn't make it true.
>hehe
Tits or get out
Not saying pride should make one blind to faults, but I don't believe there is anything inherently wrong with pride
Being apathetic or downright spiteful to the system you are a component of is just as bad as being too prideful in it
Blindly disobeying authority is just as autistic as blindly following it.
Schopenhauer was a clown.
"waahhh, life sucks, waaaaahh everything is illusion, waaaahh"
is about all his philosophy amounts to, but then he was a fucking vegetarian and instead of simply killing himself lived a self-indulgent life, completely contradicting with his actions everything he argued for in his philosophy.
He is pretty much the perfect example of a "miserable fool"--only he made himself miserable by embracing pessimism for no reason aside from being a baby about pain and suffering.
Just like a scientist specializing in physics can be dumb when he spews shit about programming which isn't his expertise;
a man who makes absolute statements in a topic of vague individualistic complexity will end up dumb as a stump and wordless if you point him towards an example of contradiction which adopts both the positive implications and the negative conclusions, in harmony, from his argument.
This is known as being a pseudo-intellectual baboon who talks too much and does too little.
I leave you with a naked woman because i believe this is the only attribute of my post which your mind will comprehend and connect with.
Schopenhauer had incredible pride, just an ego-driven pride in himself, as if he were some magical being, not affected by the historico-cultural context from which he spawned--a vain and silly and ungrateful man really, and his philosophy is pure poison.
Just because lots of dumb inbreds have pride in their country, does not make anyone who has pride in their country a dumb inbred.
Augustus had pride in his country, so did Lord Chatham, and countless other remarkable historical figures who were far more impressive characters and persons than the nihilist Schopenhauer (who refused to live as if he believed what he was saying was true--he only encouraged others to think these things).
What is wrong with having pride in your neighbour the same way you can feel pride for your brother? It's leagues above wallowing in your own jealosy, methinks. Man I love my people(it hurts when they want to destroy themselves.)
Agreed absolutism is more of a beginner thing. For example, we were taught logical fallacies are wrong. But as you get older, you begin to realize they have some truth to them if used wisely.
It's shit like this that is used to shit on W jr. that guy bought us time and showed the Jew in education.
Nietzsche was isolated and sad too, didn't mean he was so weak and pathetic (and resentful of human life in general) so as to deny any positive value in existence altogether.
He didn't say that you "can't" have pride in it, he said that it's a petty thing.
Clearly you haven't read attentively.
Go suck some nigger dicks.
Schopenhauer is the eternal philosophy for edgelords and other cancers of the human spirit.
APPEAL TO AUTHORITY
Schopenhauer is brilliant and lots of things he said are spot-on. In particular what he had to say about honour and women. But also the concept of the will is relevant as ever, and the more we learn about the human brain, the more Schopenhauer ends up proven right.
This is the kind of talk you hear from people who deluded themselves into believing they're so amazing that they're far above such mortal trifles as history and matters of state. So outrageously full of themselves that they wouldn't sacrifice a fingernail if it doesn't serve a personal cause. Marx, Stirner and of course Schopenfaggot all fall into this category. I will not pay attention to their nonsense and sweeping generalizations. People would be fucked without patriots. Commerce, independent courts, police, international agreements, all these are dependent on selfless men who want to make their nations better. If you disagree, leave society and fend for yourself like the individualist genius you are. Faggot.
I agree.
I was just giving some context to his remark, and attempting to show how useless it is to use it in our current situation.
>They are and remain a foreign oriental race, and so must be regarded merely as domiciled foreigners. When some twenty-five years ago the emancipation of the Jews was debated in the English Parliament, a speaker put forward the following hypothetical case. An English Jew comes to Lisbon where he meets two men in extreme want and distress; yet it is only in his power to save one of them. Personally to him they are both strangers. Yet if one of them is an Englishman but a Christian, and the other a Portuguese but a Jew, whom will he save? I do not think that any sensible Christian and any sincere Jew would be in doubt as to the answer. But it gives us some indication of the rights to be conceded to the Jews.
Damn. What did he mean by this?
>The highest civilization and culture, apart from the ancient Hindus and Egyptians, are found exclusively among the white races; and even with many dark peoples, the ruling caste, or race, is fairer than the rest, and has, therefore, evidently immigrated, for example, the Brahmins, the Inca, and the rulers of the South Sea Islands. All this is due to the fact that necessity is the mother of invention, because those tribes that emigrated early to the north, and there gradually became white, had to develop all their intellectual powers, and invent and perfect all the arts in their struggle with need, want and misery, which in their many forms, were brought about by the climate. This they had to do in order to make up for the parsimony of nature, and out of it came their high civilization.
You're referring to ignorance, not dumbness aka stupidity, and no he wasn't dumb in that area he lived in a vastly different milieu
Kek it wasn't a serious post, because saying someone is too dumb to agree with you is already ridiculous and faulty
Nice try. Conveniently ignoring Asians especially China, which invented many things ahead of whitey
>Sup Forums has resorted to calling him stupid
Pottery
>we had chinese restaurants before whitey
all the worse for you, xiaoping
Sup Forums has never claimed to be the internet's best and brightest
either way it's pointless to argue against cherry-picked out-of-context quotes that support your viewpoint when we can do the same to support ours
to think that schopenhauer was in any way compatible with "your side," ideologically or politically, displays a wilful ignorance
well he's saying it is bad :D:D:D:D:D
Schopenhauer was a childless beta male who retreated to his library/study because he couldn't cope with the real world.
People who have achieved nothing arnt allowed to be ethno national centrists like the successful white kids.
What he said about women was just a more angry and vitriolic repetition of thing that had been said 100s of times before.
He didn't have much to say about the human brain that hadn't already been said by Hume, so what exactly have we "learnt about the human brain that proves him right"? His concept of the will is no more than a platitude.
His metaphysics is not any more proven than anyone else's, nor is it even slightly useful (indeed, if it were adopted by the majority of people, the human species would rapidly go extinct--even the man himself couldn't live out his own philosophy, which suggests something defective in its nature)
Then he cried that no-one was reading his books. The man was a giant baby who encouraged others to adopt a philosophy of desolation--not a worthwhile human being really, twisted and hypocritical to the extreme.
Nah, he was all about the self and the individual will--basically, a resentful loner who dealt with this by lashing out at everyone and everything with some clever (but not at all wise) philosophy. He has always been a favorite for people with only a passing interest in philosophy
>What he said about women was just a more angry and vitriolic repetition of thing that had been said 100s of times before.
He never claims to be the first to make the observations - yet apparently they didn't stick. And given your butthurt reaction it seems like it is still required to repeat them yet another 100 times.
>so what exactly have we "learnt about the human brain that proves him right"? His concept of the will is no more than a platitude.
Clearly you either haven't read Schopenhauer or you didn't understand Schopenhauer. To Schopenhauer, humans are not fully reasonable creatures but most of all creatures controlled by their subconsciousness, which to Schopenhauer is what he calls the "will". Your conscious thoughts are merely manifestations of the will, i.e. your subconscious emotions, desires, etc.
>Nah, he was all about the self and the individual will
Not at all. Schopenhauer saw compassion as the tool to break the vicious cycle of suffering. However, Schopenhauer makes no such demands, much more important are his observations of the status quo than his interpretations and his advice on how to end it.
>every miserable fool with no accomplishment is a nationalist
>every nationalist is a miserable fool with no accomplishment
These are two different statements.
>Clearly you either haven't read Schopenhauer or you didn't understand Schopenhauer. To Schopenhauer, humans are not fully reasonable creatures but most of all creatures controlled by their subconsciousness, which to Schopenhauer is what he calls the "will". Your conscious thoughts are merely manifestations of the will, i.e. your subconscious emotions, desires, etc
derpp.. Hume already said that, in like one sentence: "Reason is, and ought only to be the slave of the passions, and can never pretend to any other office than to serve and obey them." (T 2.3.3 p. 415)
Same shit said in different words, but he didn't feel the need to fetishize the whole thing like Schop did.
And yeah, compassion doesn't break suffering--how could it? Suffering is endemic to life and compassion amplifies that suffering rather than lessons it if you take the nihilistic outlook of Schop
As i said, the man was an arch-hypocrite with a philosophy riddled with contradictions, and thus appeals to edgelords and fedoras and other cretinous individuals who want to make themselves feel hip and oh-so-brave by parroting his nonsense (I suppose Germans too). He had some decent ideas, but his philosophy, taken as a whole, was shitty and amateurish to say the least. There is a reason Nietzsche effectively grew out of him.
>Whitey
If whites lose 3 or 4 IQ points to East Asians, they more than make up for it with superior looks, height, strength, creativity, ambition, and accomplishment.
This.
He meant that he is a pessimistic nihilistic MGTOW and I don't give a shit what a fucking leaf quoting a philosopher he has no clue about thinks.
That's a singular quote, but ultimately Hume was a proponent of the free will - he saw it as a necessity and tried hard to bring is work in unison with it. Schopenhauer on the other hand takes things a step further: he rejects it or at least sees it severely impacted by his concept of the will.
Not to mention that Schopenhauer was heavily influenced by Hume and says himself that:
"On a single page by David Hume one can learn more than from the entirety of Hegel's, Herbart's and Schleiermarcher's works combined."
The idea that they were in opposition is ridiculous. Schopenhauer expanded on him.
>compassion doesn't break suffering--how could it?
You clearly haven't read Schopenhauer if you have to ask that question as he explains it in great detail. But as I said: Schopenhauer's interpretations and advices (which are actually quite rare) are of secondary importance. Important is his analysis and what we can learn from it.
>As i said, the man was an arch-hypocrite with a philosophy riddled with contradictions,
Where are the contradictions? I don't see them.
All I get from you is a butthurt SJW vibe of someone who got confronted with a hurtful truth and thus feels the need to lash out at the messenger - not addressing his arguments but trying to discredit him ad-hominem, calling him names, questioning his lifestyle, etc.
Not to mention that these are IQ averages. I wonder how the actual distribution looks like. I wouldn't be surprised if East Asians were on average more intelligent but had less geniuses and less complete retards. Same with women, who on average are more intelligent than men too.
Fuggin leaf jfc
And it doesn't even have to be nationalism it could be any group really because meaning comes from the individual.
Damn son i've been btfo. The only possible other way to go now is to
>flood your country with millions of migrants that outbreed you
It is a mistake to allow the left to put politics into either you are one extreme of the other
If you actually got through Schopenhauer you straight up wasted your time. Any naive 20 something who thinks he can grapple with Kant is a faggot and Schopenhauer demonstrated that clearly. Seriously you could erase this guy from the history of philosophy and exactly jack shit would change
Women aren't more intelligent than men "on average" because the sheer number of high IQ men brings the average male IQ up past the average female IQ.
But if you were to grab 4 random middle IQ men and 4 random middle IQ women, chances are the 4 middle IQ women would have a (very) slightly higher average IQ. Just barely.
That might as well be the case. If anything it should tell one that the average alone doesn't say much about the statistic as a whole.
If you've done nothing but win the genetic lottery, you are riding on the coat tails of others; being a leech.
Here's the demarcation point:
If you've accomplished family life
A decent wage
A good standard of living
Now you're in the rights to be proud and want to see you and your people flourish and prosper. Be a man of principal and good conduct, and folks will want to emulate that. Once you have an audience, be a proud person.
Leaf, are you implying that my country is a nation? Cause its fucking not.
Except he was a huge influence of Nietzsche
You clearly dont understand German philosphy. Schopenhauer is the father of subjectivism, one of the first discoverers of the Faustian will in humanity. He believed that everything that exists for us as humans is actually nothing more than our will to see everything the way we see it. the world is a complex system of ideas which we organize through our own will. Thus Schopenhauer had to attack the old liberal form of German patriotism which proofed itself as a patriotism for the masses. A true patriot is an individualist, a personality. he doesnt embrace a Vaterland to feel better, but he does embrace a Vaterland because he knows it is an eternal part of him. The same think you will read in Nietzsches works - Schopenhauer was one of Nietzsches most important "mentors".
thinkers like Schopenhauer, Nietzsche and others were fed up with the so called "hurra-patriotism", the kind of patriotism you can witness at sport events and festivals, even though it does not mean that they were against ones love for their family, people and nation.
You also have to keep in mind that Schopenhauer was a lifetime renegade in German society; he got a lot of shit from retarded mainstream Hegel fankids and couldnt get a grip on German universities. He also hated his mother.
tldr: He was pissed at everything.
get bent german faggot
interesting nose
not an argument
He was Hitler's favorite philosopher. Sounds legit.
Quiet faggot.
The only person who would say something like this is someone who came from a shit country