3 ms·
Wittgenstein < Schopenhauer < Nagarjuna < Buddha
by iechoz6H 5y ago
Wittgenstein < Schopenhauer < Nagarjuna < Buddha
- qsort 5y agomain.hs:1:14: error: * No instance for (Ord Philosopher) arising from a use of `<'
- iamcurious 5y agoGood point, funny and goes along with user name. 10/10 would read again.
- nabla9 5y agoWittgenstein ⟂ { Nagarjuna, Buddha }
- KhoomeiK 5y agoIf we're talking about philosophy of language, Buddha himself didn't have much formal reasoning in that, did he?
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- dang 5y ago"Please don't post shallow dismissals, especially of other people's work. A good critical comment teaches us something." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- iechoz6H 5y agoIn what way was it shallow? I was simply hinting at a potential lineage of Wittgenstein's philosophy.
- dang 5y agoTo me (and not only to me) it looked like "<" meant "is less than", which would be a strange and flamebaity sort of putdown. If you meant "is derived from", that wasn't clear. It wouldn't have been flamebaity if you'd explained what you meant! In that case, though, you should have added something about why you think the lineage derives that way. (Side remark, not moderation-related: Wittgenstein read Schopenhauer as a young man but later rejected him as not a great thinker, so there's a certain burden of proof if you want to draw that line.)