/gen/ - General

>Yukio Mishima

>Ernest Junger

>Ted Kazysnki

>Neitzsche

We never had any figure who was contrarian to the society, was insane on an ecstatic level and just extremely based. Why?

>inb4 mentions some random 15th century mystic

>>660(OP)

No contrarian thinkers happen in India, only mainstream normies

>>660(OP)

We've been schopenhauerian even before schopenhauer existed anon, we are too satisfied with such a philosophy, why would we produce the exact opposite?

>>819

atul droid incoming

>>818

Huh? How explain sir

>>824

Schopenhauer was influenced by and held the upanishads in the highest regard. He was distinctly pleased when he realised his philosophy was eerily similar in base to eastern religions found in the greatest of preponderance, hinduism and buddhism. Schopenhauer’s philosophy and buddhism hold the same base conclusion: existence is suffering. Schopenhauer is insofar the western Siddartha.

‘Life swings like a pendulum backward and forward between pain and boredom’.

Nietzsche was recommended schopenhauer by one of his peers; reading schopenhauer reawakened his philosophical interest and he thought schoenhauer as his mentor(see: schopenhauer as educator). This is reflected in his early period.

His middle and latter periods are in complete defiance of schopenhauer. A sort of ‘Anti-Schopenhauer’. His philosophy by this stage is life-affirming rather than denying, it’s far too virile

than that schopenhauerian passivity. He doesn’t see ‘life as suffering’ or the world as illusion, but suffering is what someone must accept as being part of oneself, the leper must accept leprousy, the blind man blindness, the lame man lameness. They must overcome themselves despite of it. He sees ‘maya’ as cope that people use to convince themselves of an hinterwelt, a world beyond, pursuing which is the purpose of existence.

>>660(OP)

in endia most people are not unemployed