Philosophy and Art

Well, it depends on the values that are selected - or not selcted, if they are destroyed.

We are talking about a cycle. Sometimes there is much megalomania and sometimes not.

But wait and see. Like I said: “this phase will show us even more megalomaniac humans in the future”. Think of the many problems we already have currently: 7.45 billion humans, a polluted planet, injustice almost everywhere, a lot of wars and of any kind, terrorism … and so on and so forth. And now there are plenty of so-called “experts” who want to live according to their megalomania (as if they were gods) and want to tell you how you should live.

With eugenics still happening, they are Gods on rampages, literally eliminating people from the population with their engineering.

So megalomaniac people produce even more megalomaniac people.

But when and how will this story end?

Ummmm… philosophy is an art.

The globalistic phase will end in this or in the next century, I guess, and before its end there will be a lot of terror attacks, a lot of civil wars, wars with atom bomb explosions and other disasters.

The fact is that philosophy and art are not the same, regardless whether one of them is subordianted or superordinated to the other.

Category error.

You are wrong.

Philosophy and art are not the same. Faust, you are wrong.

let us think about this…

philosophy can be art, it just isn’t right now…

for example, we consider works of fiction, words put together,
as art, so philosophy as words put together can be art, at least

why philosophy hasn’t been art is because philosophers have followed
such bad writers as Kant and Hegel and haven’t followed such
good writers as Nietzsche or Camus… both of whom have written
“philosophical” works of art…

it is both the language used and format used that has prevented philosophy
from being art…both of which comes from not trying to turn philosophy
into art… if we follow Kant or Hegel we can never have philosophy
as art…

Philosophy should sing and dance as Nietzsche thought it should, but that
comes with an understanding that philosophy is not about creating systems
or logic chopping or following Spinoza in creating a book with axioms and
corollaries and this follows this…philosophy can be art if it is about
who we are and what is possible for the human to be or to become…
we can be or we can work on becoming…I believe it is more important
that we strive to becoming and not just to be…and our philosophy should
reflect that and thus becomes art…“Zen and the art of motorcycle maintenance”
is art as is the book, “Sophie’s world”

Philosophy can be and ought to be Art… as we know art… it just
takes some effort and imagination for it to do so…

Edit: another philosophical book is “The Razor’s Edge”


Philosophers are bad artists, artists are bad philosophers. Is that what you mean actually?

Kant and Hegel were good philosophers, if not the best philosophers of all times, whereas Nietzsche and Camus were bad philosophers, especially Camus, but good philosophic artists.

If that is what you mean, then I agree.

Camus was alive. As alive as Sisyphus. Philosophy was alive in him.

K: have you actually read Kant or Hegel, they are both terrible artists AND
terrible philosophers… whereas I believe both Nietzsche and Camus were
better artist AND better philosophers… both Kant and Hegel wrote crap
disguised as philosophy and no one could tell because of the language
they both used which hid their crap under unending deluge of meaningless
words like spirit…


Philosphy does not ought to be art.

I have read Kant and Hegel more intensively than you, because I have read them in their original language German. Yes, it is sometimes difficult to read them, especially Hegel, but that just does not make them “terrible philosophers”. That is just what a philosopher does not need to be: an artist. And an artist does not need to be a philosopher. That is just what I am saying.

If you want to read art, then read art.

You do not know their original language.

You are writing nonsense.

Have you not read what I replied?

If you prefer art, then be honest and just say it.

By the way:
Have you ever read mathematics books?
Have you ever read logic books?

Isn’t it basically the same discussion about a pseudo dualistic problem here on ILP: “Logic versus Ethics”, “Rationality versus Irrationality”, “Kant or Hegel versus Schopenhauer or Nietzsche” … and so on and so forth? To me, these dualisms are pseudo dualisms, not like real dualisms, for instance: “Ideality versus Reality”, “Subjectivity versus Objectivity”.

And a further example: “Spirit versus Nature”.

Couldn’t we subsume the both dualisms “Spirit versus Nature” and “Ideality versus Reality” under one dualism?

I would not.

And if I did, I would subsume both under the dualism “Subjectivity versus Objectivity”.