>I don't like x
>Therefore anything and anyone that uses x is an idiot

How's 6th grade? Learn to compose sound arguments.

Sage.

None system thinkers always produce a implied system and act schizophrenically about is rules.

It's a cheap rhetorical game to rail against systems/horizons/metaphysics/phycological reasons/obfuscation etc.

Most of the puffy birds who hang their hats on being down to earth, of the people, or unsystematic are usually the worst offenders.

>>8210223
No one said that. Now please justify your self induced enslavement.

>>8210230
I don't think Cioran or Shestov ever claimed to be down to earth. Nevermind that their flaws in no way justify the flaws of systematic thinkers.

>>8210235
Yes, the pic *says* that. If you can't see that the underlying meaning of those sentences can be reduced to a psychological relation between the author and his irrational, unjustified dislikes, you're a clueless moron.

>>8210242
I'm not saying they made all such claims, I'm just saying I till my eyes when any thinker attacks people for such positions.

The "despotism" of systematic thinking cioran is talking about the theoretical "wall" around a system.

That didn't make the system incorrect. It's just product of that mode of thinking which could only ensnare a pleb.

I like cioran but I have the same problem with him i have with Nietzsche and Schopenhauer; in the face of thinkers like Hegel and Kant they come off as (more so) true believers. It's almost embarrassing for them. I don't think they can read between the lines in some fundamental way. As if Hegel never mentally stepped outside his own framework when he felt like it. Or as if Aristotle never thought unsystematically to test his own thoughts.

Systematic thinking is despotism like a do not walk on the grass sign on an empty street is despotism. Only an autistic would worry about breaking the rules sometimes

>>8210275
>author and his irrational, unjustified dislikes
Sorry I guess we can't all be armchair psychologist and diagnose Cioran's thought process. My mistake.

everything's lies, anon, even nonfiction and santa claus

>>8210318
You don't have to be a psychologist to register invalid and vaguely-phrased arguments; especially the one in OP's pic.

Are you really this fucking dense

Go learn what a good argument consists of before you shitpost again.

>>8210318

Unless he validates his statement further in the book - in which case you should provide examples - you don't need to be a psychologist to identify an unjustified and irrational argument.

>>8210278
>As if Hegel never mentally stepped outside his own framework when he felt like it. Or as if Aristotle never thought unsystematically to test his own thoughts.
True, though I think in a lot of ways it is the mediocre followers of those systems that really pissed them off. It can be frustrating in academia to deal with people who can't be critical of a system. Nietzsche, Schopenhauer and Cioran all did not seem to think highly of academics of their time.

>>8210337
All of his books deal with this issue.

>>8210331
You have never clearly read any Cioran.

i love cioran hahaha he is so dark and intellectual and depressing and that is soooooo me. i always listen to hanl or gy!be when i listen to him (not linkin park im not an edgy teenager lol) for that depressed aesthetic

>>8210354
You make a good Cioran impression: spitting out utterly groundless claims. And that is the sad reality of continental obscurantists: they are good at seducing the youth but utterly clueless in the logic department.

>>8210341
I'll agree to that. I disliked heavily the people I met getting my own Phil degree.

But it seems a little more than just
>Systems attract retards
For a million Nietzscheians will stand toe to toe with any Aristotelian, aquinite or Hegelian of the same number and do just as disappointing a job of saying anything interesting.

>>8210194
yeah fuck the system (shows off che guevara t shirt)