I think i'm not the only one who likes philosophy here, but i wonder what philosophers are the most popular in the metal scene. my personal favs are Nietzsche, Heidegger, Freud, Camus, and many others.

Non of them are my fav, I like moustlya ll ancient philosophers, medieval, 17, 19th century, easter once, so I take something from them and make my won philosophy , my own look to the life and world , Im me I dont follow nobody and wont play for other rules, I even wont follow to leader, better choose death, so I take best ideas from those and make my own one and my philosophy it depends of seaosn,m year, place , people etch it changing but basics are forever

BTW Camus are great french Cognac too

I strongly dislike philosophy...at least the way I was forced to study it at school...classes made me sleep...I preferred the way our history teacher introduced us to the basics of the field in a "scientific" and logical way....even then it was killer to memorize which dude thought which way and which dude said he was wrong....
Philosophy's something that requires one to question everything logical and straightforward which is very hard for me....philosophy suits me only when I'm drinking....I don't wish to waste my time studying the mindless babble of some dudes who drank some centuries ago....period

Only dare to tell me "Oh, why is overall being nor rather nothing..." or start a topic similar to "Are we sleeping or actually not or is this all some collective dream of ours and what if it's all unreal or sth...." and I'll hit teh ceiling....

My favourite philosopher? Me and me bro with the help of beer.....and it's a pointless thing to waste one's time....

Written by Ernis on 29.10.2008 at 18:06

I strongly dislike philosophy...at least the way I was forced to study it at school...classes made me sleep....

That's why i never studied it. It's fantastic when you get drowned in it on your own as a habit
but choosing it as your field of study can really ruin the enjoyment.

And about the topic's question; Nietzsche, Sartre, Camus, Freud, Russel, Marx immediately occured to me as most influential ones. But indeed it's much more than that.....Oh, I forgot to mention myself as my #1 fav.

I prefer the classical age, Socrates and Aristotle are probably my two favorites. As far as western philosophy is concerned, you can almost sum it all down into those two men.

Written by AiwiAstwihad on 29.10.2008 at 18:41

Written by Ernis on 29.10.2008 at 18:06

I strongly dislike philosophy...at least the way I was forced to study it at school...classes made me sleep....

That's why i never studied it. It's fantastic when you get drowned in it on your own as a habit
but choosing it as your field of study can really ruin the enjoyment.

And about the topic's question; Nietzsche, Sartre, Camus, Freud, Russel, Marx immediately occured to me as most influential ones. But indeed it's much more than that.....Oh, I forgot to mention myself as my #1 fav.

I didn't choose it as a subject....it's just that in university philosophy is a compulsory subject in lots of departments (even departments of physics, chemistry and construction...sic!)....I know classical philosophers were also active in mathematics but beg yer pardon....this doesn't make philosophy more logic....Heiddegger's "Metaphysics" was mandatory literature for us and you may imagine I threw it to the corner after giving a try to read (and understand) the title of the introduction....namely something like "What for is overall being nor rather nothing?" (sorry...it's impossible to translate that sentence....)...no wonder philosophy literature is almost impossible to translate because how can one translate something that doesn't make any sense at all regardless the language or which can be understood as many ways as possible if at all....

Hegalian philosophy is one of my favorite...Hegel was all about self conciousness...recognizing others as part as yourself...feeling someone from an external point of view...Hegel also hated inspiration though and beleived that instead of being inspited by something that you have to work it out through inner conciousness...he was also worried about the future and that mistakes were always repeating themselves...something that a lot of German philosophers touched on...a circle of ignorance occuring over and over...

Written by Ernis on 29.10.2008 at 19:41

Written by AiwiAstwihad on 29.10.2008 at 18:41

Written by Ernis on 29.10.2008 at 18:06

I strongly dislike philosophy...at least the way I was forced to study it at school...classes made me sleep....

That's why i never studied it. It's fantastic when you get drowned in it on your own as a habit
but choosing it as your field of study can really ruin the enjoyment.

And about the topic's question; Nietzsche, Sartre, Camus, Freud, Russel, Marx immediately occured to me as most influential ones. But indeed it's much more than that.....Oh, I forgot to mention myself as my #1 fav.

I didn't choose it as a subject....it's just that in university philosophy is a compulsory subject in lots of departments (even departments of physics, chemistry and construction...sic!)....I know classical philosophers were also active in mathematics but beg yer pardon....this doesn't make philosophy more logic....Heiddegger's "Metaphysics" was mandatory literature for us and you may imagine I threw it to the corner after giving a try to read (and understand) the title of the introduction....namely something like "What for is overall being nor rather nothing?" (sorry...it's impossible to translate that sentence....)...no wonder philosophy literature is almost impossible to translate because how can one translate something that doesn't make any sense at all regardless the language or which can be understood as many ways as possible if at all....

i have to admit that i didn't understand a word of what Heidegger said himself either, but i understand the literature about him, so i use that. we don't have philosophy as a subject, but we see some philosophers in religion.

BTW, not all philosphers ask those weird questions. political philosophy normally isn't like metaphysics at all. they try to make a kind of state that is realistic and as good as possible.

I am forced to study philosophy at school too, and because of my sucky teacher I'm losing interest in this very nice subject. ATM I'm studying Kant, my favourite ones remain the Classical ones.

Written by Ernis on 29.10.2008 at 19:41

I didn't choose it as a subject....it's just that in university philosophy is a compulsory subject in lots of departments (even departments of physics, chemistry and construction...sic!)....I know classical philosophers were also active in mathematics but beg yer pardon....this doesn't make philosophy more logic....Heiddegger's "Metaphysics" was mandatory literature for us and you may imagine I threw it to the corner after giving a try to read (and understand) the title of the introduction....namely something like "What for is overall being nor rather nothing?" (sorry...it's impossible to translate that sentence....)...no wonder philosophy literature is almost impossible to translate because how can one translate something that doesn't make any sense at all regardless the language or which can be understood as many ways as possible if at all....

Well, That book you mentioned was not a good start at all (I haven't read it though) ....I personally started with Philosophical novels, They're easier to understand. during/after reading 'em try to analyze and philosophize, then read critics of other philosophers on 'em and...
All Camus/Sartre novels/plays are very good sources to start with...IMO.
And Nietzsche, is an ultimate god. He can elaborate in a sentence what others can't say in an entire book. I was so fascinated by him that wanted to learn German to be able to read his books in the original language!
IDK, maybe you won't enjoy the novels as well.

Written by AiwiAstwihad on 29.10.2008 at 22:51

Written by Ernis on 29.10.2008 at 19:41

I didn't choose it as a subject....it's just that in university philosophy is a compulsory subject in lots of departments (even departments of physics, chemistry and construction...sic!)....I know classical philosophers were also active in mathematics but beg yer pardon....this doesn't make philosophy more logic....Heiddegger's "Metaphysics" was mandatory literature for us and you may imagine I threw it to the corner after giving a try to read (and understand) the title of the introduction....namely something like "What for is overall being nor rather nothing?" (sorry...it's impossible to translate that sentence....)...no wonder philosophy literature is almost impossible to translate because how can one translate something that doesn't make any sense at all regardless the language or which can be understood as many ways as possible if at all....

Well, That book you mentioned was not a good start at all (I haven't read it though) ....I personally started with Philosophical novels, They're easier to understand. during/after reading 'em try to analyze and philosophize, then read critics of other philosophers on 'em and...
All Camus/Sartre novels/plays are very good sources to start with...IMO.
And Nietzsche, is an ultimate god. He can elaborate in a sentence what others can't say in an entire book. I was so fascinated by him that wanted to learn German to be able to read his books in the original language!
IDK, maybe you won't enjoy the novels as well.

To be honest, I found Camus and Sartre annoying and boring as well....had to read'em in highschool.....it's the thing that I read the book but it's as if in a language I don't understand....I'm unable to digest the text...therefore I fall asleep and drop the book...
I managed to get the marks tho by skimming through some net reviews and stuff....helped more or less...I passed...
In the university among the compulsory literature were also books such as "Apology of Sokrates?!" and others such plus some book I remember because of it's extremely "kvlt" title "Short Course In Decay"....you may imagine I didn't read a single of them....

Written by AiwiAstwihad on 29.10.2008 at 22:51

Written by Ernis on 29.10.2008 at 19:41

I didn't choose it as a subject....it's just that in university philosophy is a compulsory subject in lots of departments (even departments of physics, chemistry and construction...sic!)....I know classical philosophers were also active in mathematics but beg yer pardon....this doesn't make philosophy more logic....Heiddegger's "Metaphysics" was mandatory literature for us and you may imagine I threw it to the corner after giving a try to read (and understand) the title of the introduction....namely something like "What for is overall being nor rather nothing?" (sorry...it's impossible to translate that sentence....)...no wonder philosophy literature is almost impossible to translate because how can one translate something that doesn't make any sense at all regardless the language or which can be understood as many ways as possible if at all....

Well, That book you mentioned was not a good start at all (I haven't read it though) ....I personally started with Philosophical novels, They're easier to understand. during/after reading 'em try to analyze and philosophize, then read critics of other philosophers on 'em and...
All Camus/Sartre novels/plays are very good sources to start with...IMO.
And Nietzsche, is an ultimate god. He can elaborate in a sentence what others can't say in an entire book. I was so fascinated by him that wanted to learn German to be able to read his books in the original language!
IDK, maybe you won't enjoy the novels as well.

Nietzsche was the one who got me interested in philosophy. my first philosophical book i read was "the gay science" by Nietzsche. lovely how he could ridiculise the entire work of Kant in just a few sentences.

Written by belisarius on 30.10.2008 at 09:38


Nietzsche was the one who got me interested in philosophy. my first philosophical book i read was "the gay science" by Nietzsche. lovely how he could ridiculise the entire work of Kant in just a few sentences.

Really? with what arguments?

Written by Elio on 30.10.2008 at 13:58

Written by belisarius on 30.10.2008 at 09:38


Nietzsche was the one who got me interested in philosophy. my first philosophical book i read was "the gay science" by Nietzsche. lovely how he could ridiculise the entire work of Kant in just a few sentences.

Really? with what arguments?

read it for yourself:"
And, briefly: if you had thought more subtly, observed better, and learned more, you certainly would not go on calling this "duty" of yours and this "conscience" of yours duty and conscience: your understanding of the manner in which moral judgments have originated would spoil these grand words,?for example, "sin," "salvation of the soul," "redemption" have been spoiled for you.? And now don't cite the categorical imperative, my friend!?this term tickles my ear and makes me laugh despite your serious presence: it makes me think of old Kant who had obtained the "thing in itself" by stealth?another very ridiculous thing!?and was punished for this when the "categorical imperative" crept stealthily into his heart and led him astray back to "God," "soul," "freedom," and "immortality," like a fox who loses his way and goes astray back into his cage:?yet it had been his strength and cleverness that had broken open the cage!?What? You admire the categorical imperative within you? This "firmness" of your so-called moral judgment? This "unconditional" feeling that "here everyone must judge as I do"? Rather admire your selfishness at this point! And the blindness, pettiness, and frugality of your selfishness! For it is selfish to experience one's own judgment as a universal law; and this selfishness is blind, petty, and frugal because it betrays that you have not yet discovered yourself nor created for yourself an ideal of your own, your very own:?for that could never belong to somebody else and much less to all, to all!? ? Anyone who still judges "in this case everybody would have to act like this" has not yet taken five steps toward self-knowledge: otherwise he would know that there neither are nor can be actions that are the same,?that every action that has ever been done was done in an altogether unique and irretrievable way, and that this will be true of every future action,?that all regulations about actions relate only to their coarse exterior (and even the most inward and subtle regulations of all moralities so far),?that these regulations may lead to some semblance of sameness, but really only to some semblance,?that as one contemplates or looks back upon any action at all, it is and remains impenetrable,?that our opinions about "good," "noble," "great" can never be proved true by our actions because every action is unknowable,?that our opinions, valuations, and tables of what is good certainly belong among the most powerful levers in the involved mechanism of our actions, but that in any particular case the law of their mechanism is indemonstrable. Let us therefore limit ourselves to the purification of our opinions and valuations and to the creation of our own new tables of values:?and let us stop brooding about the "moral value of our actions"! Yes, my friends, regarding all the moral chatter of some about others it is time to feel nauseous! Sitting in moral judgment should offend our taste! Let us leave such chatter and such bad taste to those who have nothing else to do but drag the past a few steps further through time and who never live in the present,?which is to say the many, the great majority! We, however, want to become who we are,?the new, unique, incomparable ones, who give themselves their own laws, who create themselves! And to that end we must become the best learners and discoverers of everything that is lawful and necessary in the world: we must become physicists in order to be able to be creators in this sense,?while hitherto all valuations and ideals have been based on ignorance of physics or were constructed so as to contradict it. Therefore: long live physics! And even more so that which compels us to turn to physics,?our honesty!"

it was longer than i thought it was

XD thanks brother! It's a bit difficult to undersatnad too.

I read it in my own language, so it wasn't that difficult, but i have a hard time too when i read philosophical stuff in english.

Written by Guest on 29.10.2008 at 19:50

Hegalian philosophy is one of my favorite...Hegel was all about self conciousness...recognizing others as part as yourself...feeling someone from an external point of view...Hegel also hated inspiration though and beleived that instead of being inspited by something that you have to work it out through inner conciousness...he was also worried about the future and that mistakes were always repeating themselves...something that a lot of German philosophers touched on...a circle of ignorance occuring over and over...

Do you not find his teleological view of the world annoying?

Me, I like Heidegger, Nietzsche (fucking typical metal philosopher haha), Barthes (if he counts), Kristeva and Adorno. I'm not really a fan of the Classical/Greek thinkers, and though I like some (post)modern French theorists I fucking HATE Deleuze.

Well...thats just like...your opinion, man.

My favorite philosopher is the Dude. Simple and very ...dude.

Written by Hyvaarin on 30.10.2008 at 23:23

Written by Guest on 29.10.2008 at 19:50

Hegalian philosophy is one of my favorite...Hegel was all about self conciousness...recognizing others as part as yourself...feeling someone from an external point of view...Hegel also hated inspiration though and beleived that instead of being inspited by something that you have to work it out through inner conciousness...he was also worried about the future and that mistakes were always repeating themselves...something that a lot of German philosophers touched on...a circle of ignorance occuring over and over...

Do you not find his teleological view of the world annoying?

i have that problem too. Hegels world seems to have a goal, but i think that everything is just a reaction to the past, but those reaction are not already determined. f.e. if someone speaks to me i have the choice of answering or not. Hegel would say that i don't, he would say that the thesis of speaking requires my antithesis of answering (or not), but i think that the speaking is an impulse and that i have the choice of answering to that impulse or not. also if history has a goal (and hegel was so modest of calling himself that goal), then their has to be some intelligent being that made that goal (for hegel the absolute geist), but i don't beliee in any divine intervention on earth.

We all know that if Jesus would have alive today he would have been a great follower of Metal and yup he is my(now!) favorite philosopher.

Epicurus, Heraclitus and Aristotle from the old Greek philosophers, Hegel and Russel.

Written by Ernis on 29.10.2008 at 18:06

I strongly dislike philosophy...at least the way I was forced to study it at school...classes made me sleep...I preferred the way our history teacher introduced us to the basics of the field in a "scientific" and logical way.....

Was your school in Soviet time or made by communist tradition scene ?

My country university all national requires all student studying Marxism, Leninism, Socialism, Communism. It is bored and somewhat nonsense subjects and too much of learning by heart rather than brain working. Nowadays, no any students cared about it, mostly they passed those philosophy "politic obligated" communism. But for graduating grade requirement.

Written by FOOCK Nam on 07.05.2012 at 21:05

Was your school in Soviet time or made by communist tradition scene ?

I don't think so. At least we never studied Marxism, Leninism or anything like that.

I have a bad experience with philosophy because the professor didn't speak anything that would have sounded at least remotely logical. He was just muttering some random foreign sounding words and pondered "So, are we sleeping or not? Perhaps we are just dreaming all of it... maybe not..."

The exam was a detailed questionnaire about the history of Greek philosophy with questions such as "Who were the sophists? Explain their main viewpoints." I was 0.5 points away from failure...

Written by Ernis on 07.05.2012 at 21:10

Written by FOOCK Nam on 07.05.2012 at 21:05

Was your school in Soviet time or made by communist tradition scene ?

I don't think so. At least we never studied Marxism, Leninism or anything like that.

I have a bad experience with philosophy because the professor didn't speak anything that would have sounded at least remotely logical. He was just muttering some random foreign sounding words and pondered "So, are we sleeping or not? Perhaps we are just dreaming all of it... maybe not..."

The exam was a detailed questionnaire about the history of Greek philosophy with questions such as "Who were the sophists? Explain their main viewpoints." I was 0.5 points away from failure...

lol was he was in climax eloquence ? By the way, that "sophist" question is easy for me, xD. It seems to me philosophy/literature/history exam somewhat is easy, just remember things for multiple choice then tick..

I was into philosophy when in college, but now I dont like it too. Can say it is nice subject but not the better than other like technology/computer/Car made.

One thing I guess metalheads digging lot of philosophy,... could be the influence of the music culture : )

Written by FOOCK Nam on 07.05.2012 at 21:25

lol was he was in climax eloquence ? By the way, that "sophist" question is easy for me, xD. It seems to me philosophy/literature/history exam somewhat is easy, just remember things for multiple choice then tick..

No, it wasn't a multiple choice type of test...

I don't like philosophy if it comes to reading texts with nonsensical phrases in the vein of "Why is there something rather than nothing?"... It's boring and makes me irritated when I'm forced to study it because I have an exam.

I like my philosophy a bit more practical and clear.

Written by Ernis on 29.10.2008 at 18:06

"Are we sleeping or actually not or is this all some collective dream of ours and what if it's all unreal or sth...."

When I tried reading philosophy, I liked it, but when I got to the part about "Is the world external, or is it inside our minds?" I stopped. Philosophy questions some very, very detailed stuff that would make me go like this:

Mortimer Jerome Adler. I never had the will, the time or the money to study philosophy in a university, but his books written about God, Man, Animals, The Mind etc. made me understand some very interesting and important things. He was also a brilliant philosopher himself, easily tearing apart bad arguments for the existence of God(s), providing his own argument (which I find holds some water), he explained very well the difference between man and animals and the difference it makes and so forth. I cannot recommend his books and essays highly enough. If it wasn't for him, I wouldn't be able to pretend to be a philosopher here on MS or in real life.

Socrates and maybe Freud and Nietzsche.

Since when was Freud a philosopher, anyway? And we have no surviving works of Socrates, only him appearing as a character in Plato's dialogues, so it's really strange to name him a favorite either.

Am I the only one who doesn't like 20th century French intellectuals/"philosophers" in general? (With the exception of Foucault and Bordieu, who where most sociologists/social commentators anyway, and maybe De Beauvoir.) Nietzsche is kind of fun, but he ultimately writes a lot and says very little.

I don't have a "favorite" philosopher. I agree with some on certain topics, and with others on some others. I enjoyed Alasdair MacIntyre's After Virtue alot, probably the best work in political philosophy/ethics in ages, but I don't necessarily agree with him.

Hilary Putnam is generally pretty cool, I guess.

Kierkegaard.