Who are Sup Forums? favorite philosophers and why?

I'm curious I've begun reading again, and I was thinking I ought to start by picking up some of the work of great philosophers, and I was wondering If you had any suggestions?

Attached: death-of-socrates-AB.jpg (334x250, 76K)

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=gLu1wP9HhYM
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

>inb4 nietzsche

Aristotle.

Attached: IMG_20180315_005433.jpg (1008x760, 167K)

Locke
Leibniz
Rousseau
Adam Smith
David Hume

Attached: 004[1].jpg (1200x800, 365K)

Diogenes.

Attached: 1520325300962.jpg (255x189, 14K)

In the dark we are the same old friend.

Am i right or wrong?

plato's the best.

>one and only.

he got it right the first time - and that's all there is to say about that.

I don't follow, is that a quote from someone?

Why do you need someone else to think for you? Does that not defeat the purpose?

Attached: manofculture.jpg (448x401, 27K)

Hegel's ideas are incredibly interesting, but reading him is a fucking pain. Cliche, but some of Nietzsche's stuff is pretty gosh darned good. Kant is usually pretty good, but much like Hegel he suffers from continental obscurantism.

Alan Watts put over chillstep is nice to listen to.

youtube.com/watch?v=gLu1wP9HhYM

Attached: NX3kLKrNnfnBKpL71fL9HJpHEa0M3_t-XztqQWhbfJQ.jpg (510x768, 208K)

tpbp.
natural law is the ultimate philosophy which the dark occultists of the world (jews, freemasons, and other evil orders) wish to keep hidden.

Honestly, outside of tubro-autists, just read a Commentary on Hegel.
Also, everyone should be reading more Cicero. Fuck Antony.

>stand out of my sun

the fucking king

Alan Watts isn't much of a conventional philosopher, but his words and ideas have transformed my perception in a way that Plato hasn't. His analogy of the prickles and goos is explains why this is, for all of western philosophy is a game of logical positivism. That's not to say that western philosophy is unimportant, far from it.

Locke, Mill, Tocqueville, and Nietzsche probably.

Junger

Tocqueville was actually really smooth reading for as much shit as he gets about his style.

Julius Evola
Francis Parker Yockey
Pretty much the only 20th century philosophers worth a shit and emphasize violence as being absolutely necessary.

Attached: newton.jpg (570x424, 142K)

Descartes' "Meditations on the First Philosophy". Absolutely brilliant. First time I read it, it triggered an existential crisis due to his words deconstructing my entire reality.

Attached: rene-descartes-37613-1-402.jpg (300x300, 13K)

>ctrl+f joe rogan
>no results
im disappoint

Are we the same in the dark?

It is a simple innocent question.

heidegger

Kant really think of any philosophers off hand.

No, the only thing that's present in the dark is that which we can perceive through the minimal lighting. Reality depends on the observer.

St Augustine

None of you remember to post this

Attached: UnsungPhilosopher.jpg (1800x1322, 350K)

Diogenes was already mentioned.

>Diogenes was already mentioned.
I'm talking about the pic ,not diogenes is mentioned or not

Nietzche and Jeremy Bentham, as contradicting as that might seem.

Pythagoras, for mysticism, art, geometry, and music.

Attached: pythagoras-painting.jpg (600x900, 75K)

Nice trips, and Tocqueville could also deliver some redpills.

Attached: de_Tocqueville_quote.jpg (1200x600, 300K)

Confucius, provided you have good commentary on it.
Really important to chew on if you're conservative, since he's hyper-conservative in a sense.

Donald J. Trump

Diogenes.
>was a cynic
>didn't give a shit
>lived in a barrel with other animals
>roasted Alexander The Great on multiple occasions
>Masturbated in public
>If Alexander wasn't Alexander he wanted to be him

Need I say more

Attached: Screenshot_20180315-171830.jpg (1076x853, 395K)

Thomas Hobbes. The state of nature and natural law means everything.

Plato.
Shakespeare.

I don't really give a shit about philosophy I'm too stupid but probably Jesus Christ

All my heroes are dead; except Gallagher. And he's not as funny as he used to be.

This

>Am i right or wrong?
Wrong.

pic related

Attached: Charles-mansonbookingphoto_(enlarged)_1971.jpg (300x387, 30K)

Schopenhauer

"The wise have always said the same things, and fools, who are the majority have always done just the opposite"

Attached: japanese internment camps.jpg (500x313, 31K)

Emil Cioran
He urges the nationalists to be fanatics and believe in their nations mesianic/profetic mission. He wants a Romania with the population of China and historic destiny of France.
He also considers that if a great nations and not only, uses things like slavery should be considered a virtue if it helps making it more glorious.
He is a Sup Forums aproved philosopher

I supposed he is /ourphilosopher/

Thomas Hobbes. His work Leviathan is the book that brought me to the right. It's a very impressive work, earning him three edicts for his death in the civil war.

Julius Evola. This mans' work is crucial to being any sort of Third Positionist in a Post-Modern world

Aristotle makes sense. What is the far-right but natural law writ large?

Sounds like kind of a tool, I am thinking you only like him because he is pro your country not cause he has good ideas.
The ideas you said by him are dumb, you can't feed a billion people from your farmland in Romania and wanting to be like France is just weird..
Slavery is for loosers.

>Rousseau
>the first man to claim that he owned a piece of man was evil
Try Hobbes for real political philosophy
Hegel is shit, Kant is not obscure at all
acceptable, barely

I need to read Evola. Every time I hear about his philosophy it sounds like bs though.

Many people have already suggested Kant, which I think is good. Aristotle and the Catholic trio (Augustine, Aquinas, Anslem) are good.

If you want someone kinda out there who will blow your mind try Spengler's Decline of the West.

*piece of man should be piece of LAND

He`s very redpilled.
He considers the ``sins`` that a nation commits in it`s way to glory like enslavement of the blacks or the rounding up of jews to be morally justifiable if it helps a nation achieve a higher level of civilization and development.
He encourages that the citizens of a nation should believe in their country with a fanatical pasions, that they should pursue their uniqueness and attempt to become a great civilization the size of China and with the history of France and Germany. He rejects civic-nationalism.
IF you dissagree with any of this you`re a blue pilled faggot. He is 100% Sup Forums aproved.
He considers the colonial one of the greatest eras in human civilization, he is against (((white-guilt))).

Attached: cynic.png (2518x1024, 246K)

Aristotle.

Attached: 15211019991417747835124123936620.jpg (4656x3492, 3.49M)