Exisentialism is the most punk rock philosophy, but Diogenes is the most punk rock philosopher.
This comic is 100% accurate to both Freud's overall philosophy, and his historical therapy sessions.
Turns out Heraclitus was right. Like he said, fire is awesome, or something like that.
The Frankfurt School was a group of philosophers and social critics in Germany that rose to prominance after the War. They worked on Marxist and Hegelian thought, and along with Derrida and the "postmodernists" have been subject to various conspiracies that they were "destroying western civilization", often even being lumped together, even though they had little in common.
One thing Derrida in particular is accused of is making everything "subjective", the Frankfurt School might even get accused of this themselves, even though a lot of their work is directly opposed to this. They, in fact, pointed out the under modern capialism "reason" had taken on a meaning of technical reason, or subjective reason. "Rationality" was using your intellence to achieve your aims, rather than participating in a sort of broad Hegelian rationality, where we advance human thought in general. So a game theorist, for example, might point out that there are instances where everyone is behaving "rationally", but it culminates in an irrational result. For people like Marcuse, this kind of thing has lost the grander meaning of the term "rationality". Under Capitialism in America, everyone became isolated and encouraged to be "rational" by using their intelligence to succeed by making as much money as possible. People will even say stuff like that the Media is only behaving rationally by maximizing their profits by running clickbait articles to get the most traffic, rather than actually reporting serious news and informing the population. Well, this is a very odd sense of what rationality is, and would have been very foreign to how people like Kant and Hegel used the term. Reducing rationality to an instrumental and subject force creates a society where random, chaotic market forces of "rational" consumers drives the entire society, with no human rationality being applied to what we should be doing in the larger sense. So you have rationality itself responsible for the quite irrational actions of our society, such as consuming so much that we destroy the planet.
Rick Roderick has a good lecture series that is accessible on some of these thinkers, on YouTube.
One thing Derrida in particular is accused of is making everything "subjective", the Frankfurt School might even get accused of this themselves, even though a lot of their work is directly opposed to this. They, in fact, pointed out the under modern capialism "reason" had taken on a meaning of technical reason, or subjective reason. "Rationality" was using your intellence to achieve your aims, rather than participating in a sort of broad Hegelian rationality, where we advance human thought in general. So a game theorist, for example, might point out that there are instances where everyone is behaving "rationally", but it culminates in an irrational result. For people like Marcuse, this kind of thing has lost the grander meaning of the term "rationality". Under Capitialism in America, everyone became isolated and encouraged to be "rational" by using their intelligence to succeed by making as much money as possible. People will even say stuff like that the Media is only behaving rationally by maximizing their profits by running clickbait articles to get the most traffic, rather than actually reporting serious news and informing the population. Well, this is a very odd sense of what rationality is, and would have been very foreign to how people like Kant and Hegel used the term. Reducing rationality to an instrumental and subject force creates a society where random, chaotic market forces of "rational" consumers drives the entire society, with no human rationality being applied to what we should be doing in the larger sense. So you have rationality itself responsible for the quite irrational actions of our society, such as consuming so much that we destroy the planet.
Rick Roderick has a good lecture series that is accessible on some of these thinkers, on YouTube.
"This is a strawman of Ayn Rand. She would have paid Augustine a fair price for that bread before throwing it in the trash."
😁2
In moral philosophy, the three major branches of ethical theory are Utilitarianism, such as espoused by Henry Sidgwick, which says that moral actions relate to their consequences that they bring about; Virtue Ethics, as espoused by Elizabeth Anscombe says moral actions are those that have a certain intentionality of a virtueous person (that is to say the morality is internal, in a sense); and Deontology, as espoused by Immanual Kant, which says that moral actions are those that follow certain rules. Although not as popular among philosophers these days, a fourth type of moral theory is Divine Command Theory, as espoused by Saint Augustine, which says that moral actions are those that follow God's commands.
For a great many questions of practical morally, these three systems will agree, such as "should you give your extra food to a starving man." This would have a good consequence, be a virtuous intent, follow a good rule, and would be as God commands it. In fact, such moral values are so universal that it is hard to think of any philosophy, culture, or religion at any time who says that a rich man should walk by a starving poor man and not be obliged to give him bread.
That is, of course, except for Ayn Rand.
For a great many questions of practical morally, these three systems will agree, such as "should you give your extra food to a starving man." This would have a good consequence, be a virtuous intent, follow a good rule, and would be as God commands it. In fact, such moral values are so universal that it is hard to think of any philosophy, culture, or religion at any time who says that a rich man should walk by a starving poor man and not be obliged to give him bread.
That is, of course, except for Ayn Rand.