2 - 5. Bunch of dead guys bullying you from beyond the grave

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5594298&forum_id=2...id.#48086950)

St. Paul

Tillich

Nietzche

Barth

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5594298&forum_id=2...id.#48085565)

Nietzche's idea that we lived in a post-moral society and the world was merely a canvas for moral action to express oneself sounds nice, but falls apart under any real scrutiny.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5594298&forum_id=2...id.#48087092)

edit: I except his aphorisms from this criticism

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5594298&forum_id=2...id.#48087356)

his descriptive work I find most useful

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5594298&forum_id=2...id.#48087379)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5594298&forum_id=2...id.#48087389)

I have read literally all of Nietzsche possibly excepting a few very obscure works

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5594298&forum_id=2...id.#48089492)

They were simply never written in the German language before. That's what made Nietzsche different. Even poasters ITT are praising him as a writer, not as a thinker. If Germans had been writing books in German in the 7th century AD, what do you think they would say about Christianity as a religion? How much natural affinity would they have for Plato?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5594298&forum_id=2...id.#48089587)

the aphorisms are just nonstop bangers

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5594298&forum_id=2...id.#48089532)

Jesus

Eric Hoffer

BAP

Michel Foucault

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5594298&forum_id=2...id.#48085570)

St Augustine

St Thomas Aquinas

Plato

Heraclitus

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5594298&forum_id=2...id.#48085812)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5594298&forum_id=2...id.#48085917)

But too many reddit globohomos take it as gospel rather than literally an instruction manual to the will to power--which was his intent!

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5594298&forum_id=2...id.#48086773)

2. Me

3. Kant

4. Hume

5. Plato

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5594298&forum_id=2...id.#48085936)

Nagarjuna

Sun Tzu

Vyasa

Asvaghosa

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5594298&forum_id=2...id.#48085975)

2. Spencer

3. Leiter

4. Wittgenstein

5. West

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5594298&forum_id=2...id.#48086005)

2. Whokebe

3. Bboooom

4. TT

5. solzy

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5594298&forum_id=2...id.#48086253)

there's more to the trinity than "divine simplicity" bru. And no, your "sola scriptura" nonsense belongs squarely to luther and other populists. without Origen (and, admittedly, John) there's no chance christianity would be more than an itinerant wanderer's faint insane ramblings. that separates us from Islam, bru

too many theology poasts (and theologists!) think "the subject" is somehow reflective of inner moralism or some other gobbledygook. "philosophy" in a modern sense is the attempt through the revival of antiquity to somehow erase christ from european thought. and you realize it's a joke when you're a true liberal artist

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5594298&forum_id=2...id.#48086756)

to be frank, i don't see how you could read Summa without throwing up

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5594298&forum_id=2...id.#48086836)

Wittgenstein

Nietzsche

Kant

Probably Marx if you mean most influential

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5594298&forum_id=2...id.#48086735)

1. Augustine

2. Plato

3. Kierkegaard

4. Kant

5. Origen

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5594298&forum_id=2...id.#48086764)

If I was fair to my education I'd probably put Hegel at 1, but he's been retconned by too many frauds and, ultimately, it's incomprehensible drivel (that did, admittedly, help me with the lsat)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5594298&forum_id=2...id.#48087180)

Seneca

Plato

Socrates

Epicurious

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5594298&forum_id=2...id.#48086932)

“I believe in Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the orderly harmony of what exists, not in a God who concerns himself with the fates and actions of human beings.” - Einstein, 1929 telegraph. Also wrote about S in 1949 letter

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5594298&forum_id=2...id.#48093745)

kant

aristotle

plato

rousseau

hobbes

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5594298&forum_id=2...id.#48086977)

In terms of intellectually—at least his earlier stuff is I think fundamentally valid and is misunderstood. His analysis of how certain concepts become thought of as such in things like The Order of Things is valid and interesting. I think the problem is that people hear “scientific knowledge is socially constructed” and fail to grasp that what Foucault or Kuhn or whoever is saying is that scientific knowledge is a certain type of knowledge that claims various privileges and responsibilities and how we arrive at those is somewhat contingent. But think people read that as saying “scientific facts themselves aren’t real,” which is false. Like I don’t think Foucault would say “oh if I drop a pen on the floor it won’t fall.” He might quibble with what and why all those concepts have meanings but he wouldn’t deny that the phenomena has physical reality.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5594298&forum_id=2...id.#48088376)

heidegger + kierkegaard >> Nietzsche and Foucalt

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5594298&forum_id=2...id.#48087097)

i'm not a huge aristotle fan either

that's why rousseau is on here--i don't like rousseau at all but would be hard pressed to deny his influence

also I was drunk when i wrote this

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5594298&forum_id=2...id.#48087715)

Kant

Hobbes

Kierkegaard

Foucault

Lacan (and if you don’t let me choose Lacan I guess I’ll choose Rawls)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5594298&forum_id=2...id.#48088385)

which is not a fair criticism necessarily but I actually enjoy reading Kant so I don't think it's a problem with my horsepower

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5594298&forum_id=2...id.#48088494)

the rest of buddhism is absurd but that part gets right to the heart of it like Ecclesiastes

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5594298&forum_id=2...id.#48087352)

2. Avicenna

3. Kant

4, Descartes

5. Rousseau

Honorable mentions: Confucius, Socrates, Hume, and of course my monikersake Kierkegaard.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5594298&forum_id=2...id.#48087062)

Avicenna is there despite Aristotle not because of him.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5594298&forum_id=2...id.#48087325)

edit: I should have included Confucius. If I had to pick, I'd have to take out Socrates.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5594298&forum_id=2...id.#48087205)

Nietzsche

Aquinas

Hume

Heidegger

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5594298&forum_id=2...id.#48087336)

And what about Diogenes?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5594298&forum_id=2...id.#48087807)

Overview:

The AutoAdmit moniker " .,.,.;;,;.,..,:,,:,;.,:::,..;.,:,.,..:.,,.:.,:.::, " initiated a discussion with the post "who are the top 5 philosophers of all time" without providing any body content. This thread quickly attracted a wide range of responses, reflecting the board's diverse and often contentious views on philosophy, intellectualism, and humor.

Key Themes and Patterns:

Humorous and Irreverent Responses:

Many posters responded with humor, irony, or outright mockery, reflecting AutoAdmit's culture of irreverence and provocation.

For example, Apparatus of retards (tryna control u) listed "Bboom" as the number one philosopher, followed by "Bunch of dead guys bullying you from beyond the grave." This entry playfully inserts Boom, a known figure on the board, into the pantheon of philosophical greats, using the humor to simultaneously mock the concept of ranking philosophers and elevate a familiar poster to absurd heights.

Traditional and Unconventional Philosopher Lists:

Some posters took the question more seriously, providing lists that combined classical philosophers with contemporary or even unexpected figures.

Do Not Deny the Christ (moksha attainer) listed a mix of religious and existential figures: Jesus, St. Paul, Tillich, Nietzsche, and Barth, which aligns with a focus on Christian existentialism and theology.

peeface included a mix of political, philosophical, and popular culture figures: Donald J. Trump, Jesus, Eric Hoffer, BAP (Bronze Age Pervert), and Michel Foucault, indicating a blend of traditional philosophical discourse with modern political and cultural figures.

Frequent Mentions and Critique of Nietzsche:

Nietzsche featured prominently in several posts, both in favor and against.

Soren "Bob" Odenkierkegaard critiqued Nietzsche’s philosophy as "hipster drivel" and described him as "a lifelong cuck," reflecting a broader AutoAdmit trend of polemical engagement with well-known thinkers.

The back-and-forth between Cletus McRacism (FAGGOTCHIPPER / Hegemon) and hank_scorpio showcased a debate on Nietzsche's relevance and intelligibility, highlighting the board's preference for both erudite critique and playful antagonism.

Philosophy as a Cultural Battleground:

The thread reveals underlying cultural tensions, with references to religious figures, existentialists, and modern social critics. The inclusion of contemporary figures like BAP and Trump shows how the board's posters see philosophy not just as an academic exercise but as a living commentary on current societal issues.

Do Not Deny the Christ (moksha attainer) engages in a semi-serious exchange, advocating for Barth’s theology, while responding to criticism with succinct, quippy remarks like "Jesus was Elected to be Rejected," which mix genuine philosophical positions with board-specific lingo.

Boom as a Satirical Philosophical Figure:

Boom is frequently mentioned or alluded to, both directly and indirectly, as part of a satirical commentary on the nature of philosophy and intellectualism within the AutoAdmit community.

Posters like Trump is the Lib Killer (TDNW) explicitly state, "Booooooom is up there," humorously positioning him among historical philosophers, thereby subverting the serious discourse into a board-centric meta-commentary.

The repeated reference to Boom reflects his position on the board as a figure of both ridicule and fascination, blending the line between serious critique and in-joke.

Critique of Traditional Philosophical Canon:

Many responses critique or dismiss parts of the traditional Western philosophical canon. For instance, Soren "Bob" Odenkierkegaard dismisses Kant and Nietzsche in one fell swoop, while others like hank_scorpio attack figures like John Stuart Mill as “one of the most evil and retarded bastards to ever live.” This shows a dynamic interplay between reverence for classic philosophy and iconoclastic critiques characteristic of AutoAdmit’s culture.

Notable Poster Dynamics:

.,.,.;;,;.,..,:,,:,;.,:::,..;.,:,.,..:.,,.:.,:.::,: The original poster uses a scrambled moniker, indicating either a desire for anonymity or a humorous take on the board's culture. Their lack of body content suggests a deliberate choice to provoke discussion, relying on the community’s tendency to generate content from minimal prompts.

Apparatus of retards (tryna control u): Uses humor to elevate Boom to the status of a philosopher, revealing both a critique of the question’s seriousness and a fondness for the community's in-jokes.

Do Not Deny the Christ (moksha attainer): Provides a theologically-oriented list, contrasting with the irreverent tone of many other responses. This poster engages in more serious exchanges, reflecting a genuine engagement with religious philosophy.

Cletus McRacism (FAGGOTCHIPPER / Hegemon): Dominates parts of the discussion with a combative and contrarian stance on Nietzsche, demonstrating the board's culture of debate and confrontation.

Soren "Bob" Odenkierkegaard: Consistently critiques mainstream philosophical ideas and figures, often taking a provocative stance, such as stating, “Nietzsche was a lifelong cuck,” which demonstrates both an awareness of philosophical discourse and a willingness to subvert it.

Mentions of Boom:

Boom is mentioned multiple times, often in humorous or ironic contexts, reflecting his role as a staple of AutoAdmit’s internal culture. He is presented as an almost mythical figure whose presence on the board warrants comparison to canonical philosophers. The repeated invocation of Boom's name serves as a meta-commentary on the nature of fame and intellectualism within the AutoAdmit community, further cementing his status as a central figure of the board's cultural narrative.

Conclusion:

This thread encapsulates the AutoAdmit community’s blend of serious intellectual engagement and subversive humor. It highlights the board's penchant for juxtaposing traditional philosophical discourse with irreverent, culturally specific humor. Boom's mentions and the broad range of responses—from traditional to absurd—demonstrate the diversity of thought and the often-contradictory nature of discussions on AutoAdmit.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5594298&forum_id=2...id.#48089373)

Dennett

David Lewis

Leibniz

Kripke

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5594298&forum_id=2...id.#48093417)