[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vr / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / asp / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / wsg / wsr / x] [Settings] [Search] [Home]
Board
Settings Home
/lit/ - Literature


Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.



File: Olavo.jpg (32 KB, 900x900)
32 KB
32 KB JPG
I'll start:
Olavo BTFOs Hume:

>Every philosophical statement about reality in general, humanity in general, or knowledge in general necessarily includes, among the objects to which it applies, the real person of the sender and the situation of discourse in which the affirmation is made. Whatever a man says about these matters he also says about himself. No one has the right to constitute, without exception, an exception to a theory that claims to be about the genus or species to which it belongs. This elementary methodological precaution has been neglected by practically all the most important philosophers of the so-called "modern" cycle, as well as by many of the schools of thought that dominate the contemporary intellectual universe. As a result, we have an imposing gallery of doctrines that tell us nothing about the world in which they were produced, much less about the real people who created them, but all about an invented world that does not include them and which they only observe since outside, from an imaginary privileged observation post. This observation post corresponds, structurally and functionally, to that of the "omniscient narrator" in works of fiction, which is not affected by the course of events narrated. Constructed with a fictional technique, but totally unaware of the expedient they employ, these philosophies are works of fiction that do not dare to present themselves as such.

Olavo BTFOs Descartes:

>1) Descartes says that he will seriously examine his own thoughts, and begins to do so in the form of autobiographical introspection. In the middle of the road, he loses the thread of his personal and concrete self, of his biographical self, and begins to speak of a generic and abstract self, the "philosophical self." He does not even notice the jump, and believes he keeps doing autobiography when he's just doing logical construction. He ends up believing that it is really this philosophical self, under whose shadow the real self disappears altogether. The result: self-observation falls on the grossest errors, such as forgetting that the temporal continuity of the self is a presupposition of the cogito and not a conclusion obtained from it.
>2) David Hume says that our general ideas have no cognitive value at all, because they are only random clusters of bodily sensations. At no time does he realize that the philosophy of David Hume, composing himself of general ideas thus formed, can not be worth much either. The philosopher's state of alienation in creating his philosophy could not be more complete.
>>
Yikes!
>>
>>13123318
I wonder when will Vicente Ferreira, Olavo and Mário Ferreira get translated to english.
>>
>>13123324
Esquerdalha faggot.
>>13123341
Very soon brother. We'll be superpower by 2025 and our culture will be exported. It'll be only a matter of time for our best philosophers to be translated to all human languages.
>>
>>13123318
>At no time does he realize that the philosophy of David Hume, composing himself of general ideas thus formed, can not be worth much either.
Hume was obviously well aware of this, although without the bit about 'not worth much' since he thought that was the only type of knowledge possible and thus the only type that had any worth.
>>
Ortega y Gasset
>>
Just ignore this thread, it contains either a braindead rightist faggot or a braindead leftists LARPing as a rightist faggot.
>>
>>13123473
Olavo is loved by anyone with a IQ high enough to understand him. Only esquerdalhas hate him, and that's because he tells the truth. He has been BTFOing PT and the esquerda for more than 50 years, and now he's BTFOing the milicos as well. How can one man be so based?
>>
>>13123353
This. That's not the proper objection. If someone seriously maintained (yes, meant) that meaning is impossible to know, and you asked him, "then how do you know what you mean?" he might respond "I don't know. Spooky, isn't it?" Better to ask him in what sense he thinks he can "know" meaning: Kant's criticism.
>>
>>13123577
Only a sith deals with absolutes
>>
>>13123318
>astrologer

dropped

also he doesnt look nearly as based as that pic you posted
>>
>>13123625
>he still hasn't gotten to the astrology level despite the fact that every truly big-brained boy in history inevitably devotes themselves to the study of it
it's okay. it's the top of the mountain and all roads lead to it so it'll always be there waiting for you.
>>
>>13123625
Why are esquerdalhas so obssessed by this irrelevant fact of the man's life? It's so pathetic lol. Astrology has some interesting aspects, and it's no wonder someone like Olavo, who was a follower of Guenon at some point, would be interested by it. It's just esoteric and kool, nothing more. It literally makes no difference whatsoever, why do you guys keep repeating this?
>>
>>13123615
You have to wonder what Hume would have said in response to Kant
>>
The fact that Olavo is probably the most relevant Brazilian philosopher alive (because most of them are just writing self-help in the guise of pop philosophy) tells a lot about the intellectual state of the country. Truly sad.

>>13123577

A bunch of monkeys with high IQ, how impressive.



Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.