miércoles, 27 de enero de 2010

A Hypothetical Smackdown of Epicstential Proportions


The Pot - Tool
One Headlight - The Wallflowers
Longshot Kick de Bucket - The Pioneers
Especially in Michigan - Red Hot Chili Peppers
Whose Chariot? - O.A.R.


My brother, via skype chat, recently posed me the question:

"If Kierkegaard, Nietzsche, Hegel, and Descartes engaged in a philosophical death match... who would win?"

Seeing as I'm hungry, but the kitchen is occupied, and I have nothing better to do than study for a philosophy exam tomorrow, we're going to settle this right now.

However, I do believe we should supplement a few more characters to make this truly interesting.
That said, bring in Kant and Schopenhauer.

First, as I told Patrick (the brother), Descartes is immediately disqualified given the fact that
) 1 He could not possibly understand the situations of the later philosphers
2) Kant would have knocked him out cold in the rationalist v. empiricist round
3) He's French.

That leaves Kierkegaard, Hegel, Nietzsche, Kant and Schopenhauer.
I thought it only fair to Kierkegaard that there be another theist party present, hence Kant.

So. To begin this love triangle...pentagon; we can immediately form teams:

Hegel, on the side of the continental/mass philosophists
Schopenhauer and Kant in the realm of metaphysics
Nietzsche and Hegel for atheism
Kant and Kierkegaard for theism
Schopenhauer for the aesthetic
Kierkegaard, Schopenhauer and Kant for freedom

But then, of course, we have the typical historical philosophical catfights.
Hegel was hated by Schopenhauer, Nietzsche and Kierkegaard.
Kant by Schopenhauer and Hegel
and Nietzsche hated everyone.

That means 4 to 1, Hegel and his dialectics hit the road.
HA, how's that for an opposition?...
This leaves Schopenhauer, Kant, Kierkegaard and the ubermensch himself.
Nevertheless, the next most criticized kid in the group would be Kant.
Auf Wiedersehen, Herr Kant.

So. This leaves us with the three most unstable, yet terribly brilliant and interesting minds.

Schopenhauer, I must say, would probably be the first one to go in this case.
Though I do love the guy, Nietzsche and Kierkegaard could certainly out-argue him.
...and he'd probably just start yelling "POST HOC ERGO PROPTER HOC" when he got lost.

So. Death match.
An empty room.
Two chairs facing eachother.
Two men.
Perhaps three, with a translator.
Who gives in first?

Both of these men are terribly spirited and fully engrossed in their works.
I personally prefer Kierkegaard (to breathing on most days...).
Nevertheless, Nietzsche could potentially and indefinitely stall with the whole "I'm more philosophically evolved than thou" argument that he usually throws at people.
And Kierkegaard was kind of sickly, so I don't know how long he could hold out.

Nevertheless, Nietzsche was a nihilist little bugger.

So would he care who won?


Duel of the millenium and I can't even reason this one out.
Well, I'll just resolve this the way all respectable ties are solved.

Pan the audience.

Unfortunately enough, I believe the general public would back Nietszche. Hands down.
They already have.

So good fight, Kierkegaard.
I look forward to the rematch.
Maybe we can invite Heidegger and Dilthey next time.


5 comentarios:

  1. Ok... so this is so amazingly AWESOME!!! I was laughing all the way through it. I figured that you would want to bring in Schopenhauer, but Kant surprised me.

    P.S. Heidegger would be outclassed and just a waste of time. HAHAHA!!!

  2. That's bullshit, Kierkegaard wins hands down, yo. Nietzsche' a f*cking cheat!

  3. HAHAHA agreed.
    but i would just like to see heidegger's face in the presence of true philosophy.

    and anonimo:
    thank you for the vote for kierkegaard.
    that makes my outlook on society that much brighter.

  4. I think the philosophers who didn't go crazy before death should win. Sorry Kierkegaard and Nietzsche. Also, you can tell German sucks at phonetics ~4 sounds represented in 9 letters.

  5. hmm. you have a point there.

    you have 2 points there.
    10 points for orthographic inefficiency.