Is Schopenhauer underrated?
In what context?
>>8186232
As a philosopher in his own right, not as an influence on other philosophers like Nietzsche or Wittgenstein.
>>8186231
As funny as on women is, he is underrated
>>8186239
When he was alive he was pretty unnoticed. I think he is a better writer than almost every German writer until Nietzsche (Outside of a few poets who like Kleist and Heinrich Heine who primarily did none philosophy works). He got a lot of praise though after his death.
Certainly not here.
>>8186268
>I think he is a better writer than almost every German writer until Nietzsche
I mean writer of philosophy works before someone rips me apart.
The philosopher for depressed high schoolers
>>8186279
Essentially.
>>8186279
And who is the philosopher for rich and succesful professionals?
He is not underrated in Academic circles but he is obviously not as famous in the public spheres as other "great" philosophers.
Now decide for yourself if that's bad or not or if it even matters at all.
>>8186297
Hegel, obviously.
>>8186297
Voltaire of course
>>8186297
De Sade
>>8186297
Socrates, indubitably.
>>8186297
Lenin.
His take on woman and on love is a very old fashioned one even for his own time.
Thus he'll be always underrated.
>>8186771
>Implying
As with Nietzsche, he hated mediocre women.
Like Nietzsche, he readily conceded that there are circumstances in which women can exceed their male counterparts. Pic related.
>>8186319
How does it feel to be Tumblr: The Tripfag?
>>8186791
I have some words that describe it. Refreshing, invigorating, ice, pool, blue, turquoise, water, happiness
>>8186787
This. They were misunderstood as fuck when it came to women.
Who doesn't hate mediocre women?
>>8186799
People who aren't mediocre.
During his lifetime, yes.
>>8186297
>all the wrong answers ITT
>>8186297
Ayn Rand
>>8186797
filtered
>>8186787
>>8186799
For him, women could have only exceeded men mostly on the "housemaker" terms on a larger scale.
Given the fact that romantic love started to be a thing and woman started becoming "empowered" because mankind was almost at the starting stage of a society that couldn't be only sustained by men, he was seen old fashioned. Don't get me wrong, I whole heartly agree on his view.
Also he is pretty OVERRATED on non first world countries.
>>8186297
Hobbes, Smith, you know the drill.
>>8186824
>>8186279
M8 no high schoolers can appreciate the brilliance of WWR.
It's telling the focus on his life's work here isn't in anything he contributed to philosophy besides his opinions on women. It's like, people have agendas and don't give a shit about philosophy outside of pretending to care.
>>8186297
No one.
Rich and Professionals don't waste time on trivilities like philoshopy.
>>8186840
>oh it's another feminist rant episode from a chubby transgender that identifies as a helicopter
I bet you think he's a ''misogynist'' as well
>>8186857
How did you know I was a helicopter, that's fucked up. Are you psychic?
>>8186231
Is this photo real? His head seems too large for his body and does seem to be in the same perspective.
>>8186868
>His head seems too large for his body
All great philosophers have this problem.
Kant's forehead was legendary. If he'd been born a little later, they'd have landed those German blimps on it.
>>8186863
No! I'm psycho and If I knew you in person I would bite chunks of your face off and swallow, so as to not allow the flesh to be reattached
>>8186899
Don't bite face, nobody wants that.
>>8186913
And..? I'm not the biggest fan of Schopenhauer's work, but I'm less of a fan of his audience. They seem to exclusively focus on quote mining his opinions about women over anything meaningful he had to say, because it's that which keeps threads going. But circle jerking a philosopher agreeing with you politically isn't showing that work respect, obviously. It's showing it less respect than I gave it.
>>8186293
I was in that group too. none stop arguments between materialism and idealism
>>8186923
>It's showing it less respect than I gave it.
Fair enough.
>>8186923
Outside of 4chan and places like this I almost never see this issue with his philosophy brought up. Unless it is to stir up shit and not contribute to a good discussion. Much like you are doing here and all over the board.
>>8186297
Hume certainly
>>8186297
Back aside faggots, answer is clearly Seneca
>>8186854
I assume this is irony, because rich professionals only waste their time on trivialities.
