When someone asks ‘what’s the use of philosophy?’ the reply must be aggressive, since the question tries to be ironic and caustic. Philosophy does not serve the State or the Church, who have other concerns. It serves no established power. The use of philosophy is to sadden. A philosophy that saddens no one, that annoys no one, is not philosophy. It is useful for harming stupidity, for turning stupidity into something shameful. Is there any discipline apart from philosophy that sets out to criticise all mystification, whatever their source and aim, to expose all the fictions without which reactive forces would not prevail?…Finally, turning thought into something aggressive, active and affirmative. Creating free men, that is to say men who do not confuse the aims of culture with the benefit of the State, morality or religion….Who has an interest in all this but philosophy? Philosophy is at its most positive as a critique, as an enterprise of demystification.
Deleuze, Nietzsche and Philosophy, 106. (via trivial-brew)

(Source: theerrand)

(Reblogged from deactiavtedhookedonsemiotics)

Notes

  1. harjol reblogged this from theerrand
  2. theoretical-and-philosophical reblogged this from interruptions
  3. aestheticization reblogged this from theoretical-and-philosophical
  4. until-they-do reblogged this from turtlenipntoxicshock
  5. ookkttaannee reblogged this from gorgeouswind
  6. nakazn reblogged this from leviathvn
  7. mermaid-pussy reblogged this from kawaiikegaard
  8. kawaiikegaard reblogged this from rudermensch
  9. sociallyunacceptablezombie reblogged this from schopenflower
  10. gorgeouswind reblogged this from grandpasessions
  11. interruptions reblogged this from adornoble
  12. noonereadstheurl reblogged this from schopenflower
  13. calogerosonnyanello reblogged this from aidsnegligee
  14. qwertyoop reblogged this from schopenflower
  15. peemsterandhalsadick reblogged this from aidsnegligee