Why has British Philosophy gone so downhill in the last century?
I mean I can barely name a single British Philosophy of worth in the last 40 years other than Simon Critchley who is rather dull
252
These Englishmen are no race of philosophers. Bacon signifies an attack on the spirit of philosophy in general; Hobbes, Hume, and Locke have been a debasement and a devaluing of the idea of a "philosopher" for more than a century. Kant raised himself and rose up in reaction against Hume. It was Locke of whom Schelling was entitled to say, "Je méprise Locke" [I despise Locke]. In the struggle with the English mechanistic dumbing down of the world, Hegel and Schopenhauer (along with Goethe) were unanimous - both of these hostile fraternal geniuses in philosophy, who moved away from each other towards opposite poles of the German spirit and in the process wronged each other, as only brothers can.13 What's lacking in England, and what has always been missing, that's something that semi-actor and rhetorician Carlyle understood well enough, the tasteless muddle-headed Carlyle, who tried to conceal under his passionate grimaces what he understood about himself, that is, what was lacking in Carlyle - a real power of spirituality, a real profundity of spiritual insight, in short, philosophy.14 It is characteristic of such an unphilosophical race that it clings strongly to Christianity. They need its discipline to develop their "moralizing" and humanizing. The Englishman is more gloomy, more sensual, stronger willed, and more brutal than the German - he is also for that very reason, as the more vulgar of the two, more pious than the German. He is even more in need of Christianity. For more refined nostrils this same English Christianity has still a lingering and truly English smell of spleen and alcoholic dissipation, against which it is used for good reasons as a medicinal remedy - that is, the more delicate poison against the coarser one. Among crude people, a subtler poisoning is, in fact, already progress, a step towards spiritualization. The crudity and peasant seriousness of the English are still most tolerably disguised or, stated more precisely, interpreted and given new meaning, by the language of Christian gestures and by prayers and singing psalms. And for those drunken and dissolute cattle who in earlier times learned to make moral grunts under the influence of Methodism and more recently once again as the "Salvation Army," a twitch of repentance may really be, relatively speaking, the highest achievement of "humanity" to which they can be raised: that much we can, in all fairness, concede. But what is still offensive even in the most humane Englishman is his lack of music, speaking metaphorically (and not metaphorically -). He has in the movements of his soul and his body no rhythm and dance - in fact, not even the desire for rhythm and dance, for "music." Listen to him speak, or watch the most beautiful English woman walk - in no country of the earth are there lovelier doves and swans - and finally, listen to them sing! But I'm demanding too much . . .
>>8058236
Its beautiful to see put into exact words what we all intuitively know as true
>>8058274
The fuck is this? Name just ONE black philosopher
>all those vague cringey attempts at """wisdom"""
>spirit
Oh god, mainland european philosophers are a fucking embarassment. Even the greeks.
British Isles and the USA are the only sources of worthwhile philosophy
>inb3 "but but what about Leibniz speculating on the number of angels on the head of a pin!!!"
>>8058128
John Dupré
>>8058236
holy shit this goes hard as fuck, englishmen btfo
>>8058280
it called a troll, jackass, literally lolling right now
>>8058280
Frantz Fanon
>>8058289
come on now, resentful marxist whining isn't serious philosophy
>>8058128
Could have been okay bait, but then you just had to sneak in the Simon Critchley mention, which makes it way too blatant. 0/10.
>>8058293
>come on now, you cannot possibly reach my goalpost if I keep moving it
>>8058308
any nigger with an axe to grind and an incumbency at some college is probably going to be considered a "philosopher"
>>8058236
>English had the Magna Carta and all kinds of democratic freedoms for centuries, Anglicanism which was rather lassez faire in its spirituality and was started because the king was pissed at the Pope for not sanctioning his adultery
>meanwhile the Germans spent their entire existence in the clutches of imperials, infighting warrior kings and unmatchingly genocidal dictators, and engages in constant "kulturkampf" because it made the mistake of giving birth to Martin Luther
>has the audacity to say this
talk about projecting
>>8058128
>>8058314
jealous that a nigger went to college while you didn't?
>>8058236
>the English mechanistic dumbing down of the world
Succinctly sums up Anglo philosophy. It is pervasive or even dominant today in common thinking thanks to the Anglo globalists essentially conquering the world via capital.
Think of the contemporary "greats" in the US, Chomsky, Dennet, Pinker... etc. All perfectly empirical and honest but they have no mental framework to really tackle problems of philosophy, other than quantifying and dissecting like it is a science.
>>8058274
Black philosophers are too obsessed with historicism and sensory crap to deal with big boy philosophy. Cornel West has his place on my shelf but we wont matter for shit when the revolution comes.
>>8058524
you sound like one of those fascists in the 1920s, talk properly
>>8058128
AC Graylingi can see you all searching for the best hat picture
>>8058280
Avicenna, AverroesI think
BERNARD WILLIAMS YOU PLEBS YOU FUCKING PLEBS
Only decent British philosophers are into Virtue Ethics and Aristotle.
The rest are very bad. Set philosophy back by centuries. Should not be taught.
>>8058236
See all this as a complement desu
>Britain carrying on the noble spirit of Aristotle in empirical observation and logic
>Boole
>Bacon
>Based Hume
>>8059156
>Anglo Analytic Autist
>Posting anime
Well surprise, surprise
>>8059156
But those guys pissed all over Aristotle's metaphysics
>>8058245
It isn't, and you're suckered in by whatever biases you have which are confirmed in the above untrue passage. Dragging Hume in as another data point to make the argument is what lets us know that the author has really fallen off. Although while we're down in the mud, it's worth pointing out (if only to rob others of the pedantic opportunity of doing so) that Hume was Scottish, and not English.
It's just a long, (anti) nationalistic ad-hom masquerading as an insight. The thing takes about half its length to get to its point: "the English don't have muh squishy feels so um they're not doing philosophy, also they're dumb."
Yes yes, there's totes qualia and spirits and metaphysics and teleology and forms and such. For an Honest Man of the continent, we could use a man like Diogenes about now.
>>8058280
neil degrasse tyson
>>8058409
>>8059900
Not fooling me slimey limey
You clearly haven't heard of either Colin Wilson or Roger Scruton.
>>8059981
>a literally dead Existentialist and a near dead "traditional conservative"
No you're right, I haven't heard of them
>>8058827
Thanks for the feedback bro, I thought it sounded more communist but w/e
>>8058128
Have you read any of
Parfit, Foot, Williams, Cohen, Fine, Blackburn, Strawson, Grice, Dummett, Evans,Williamson, Burnyeat, or Vlastos
?
>>8058975
Avicenna was Persian and Averroes was Moorish, so North African not black African
>>8059981
>taking Roger Scrotum seriously
Maybe he has a few good points, but overall he's slimier than a hentai slime girl.
>>8058280
Dubois
>>8061723
How
>>8059900
Someone's wanker's been buttressed.
>>8061780
> Professor Roger Scruton, darling of the moral right, asked one of the world's biggest tobacco companies for £5,500 a month to help place pro-smoking articles in some of Britain's most influential newspapers and magazines.
If that were his only fault, it wouldn't be a big deal, but he is either misrepresenting authors on purpose or is incompetent:
> Scruton indulges in a paranoid style of reading, too. Hurrying on from Deleuze’s respected works on Spinoza and Kant, he decides to locate “the true nature of his thinking” elsewhere. Similar treatment is accorded Žižek. Scruton introduces this impish superstar of the philosophical commentariat with a purr of approval: Žižek is “seriously educated”, he “writes perceptively of art, literature, cinema and music”, and “he always has something interesting and challenging to say” about current events. And yet in the next paragraph, Žižek is a global “nuisance”. So where must we look for his intellectual sin? Why, in “the true content of his message”: in “his little pellets of poison”, such as Žižek’s notorious claim that Hitler was “not violent enough”.
> All quotation is selective and all quotation is out of context — still, you cannot really get away with quoting such a deliberately provocative formulation of Žižek’s without saying what he means. Žižek is arguing that it would have been better had Hitler engaged in a thoroughgoing remaking of social and political institutions, rather than a programme of industrialised mass murder. By refusing to explain this, Scruton disingenuously invites the reader to suppose that Žižek thinks Hitler ought to have killed more people.
>inb4 quoting The Guardian. My point still stands.
>>8058128
NICK LAND?!?!?
>>8058280
Socrates bruh
>>8058395
>Nietszche
>german
Nice one m8
>>8061816
>Žižek thinks Hitler ought to have killed more people
based
>>8061889
This, didn't know Žižek was that cool.
