Does the work of any philosopher frighten you

Question

My friend told me that he was frightened by Nietzsche's idea of the ubermensch

Answer 1

no, BUT SOMETIMES I AM AFRAID OF MY OWN PHILOSOPHIES.  

Answer 2

No, I've never been frightened by any philosopher. Your friend is too easy to frighten.

Answer 3

Hegel.  He's so difficult to understand, it's frightening.

Answer 4

no

Answer 5

I find the most reductionist and materialist philosophies frightening.

I have in mind especially Thomas Hobbes, David Hume, and Bertrand Russell.  

Answer 6

I am not frightened by philosophies.  They are, after all, no more than one person's thoughts.

What does frighten me is how humans implement those philosophies.  The best (or more properly, worst) example that comes to mind is how Nietzsche's concept of the "Ubermensch" seemed to be have inspired much of Hitler's thoughts and actions.

Answer 7

Uebermensch is what keeps me going!

the way the miracle affected pascal's way of thinking really scares me.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal

Answer 8

Plato, not because he was not a nice man, but because his mysticism led, through Christianity, to the Dark Ages. After we reached the Enlightenment and Kant created the "synthetic/analytic dichotomy," it led to Hegel and thus to Marx. But in a different direction it led to worse.

"The theory of the analytic-synthetic dichotomy presents men with the following choice: If your statement is proved, it says nothing about that which exists; if it is about existents, it cannot be proved. If it is demonstrated by logical argument, it represents a subjective convention; if it asserts a fact, logic cannot establish it. If you validate it by an appeal to the meanings of your concepts, then it is cut off from reality; if you validate it by an appeal to your percepts, then you cannot be certain of it."

Leonard Peikoff, “The Analytic-Synthetic Dichotomy,” from

Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology"; Ayn Rand

"The man who . . . closed the door of philosophy to reason, was Immanuel Kant . . . .

"Kant’s expressly stated purpose was to save the morality of self-abnegation and self-sacrifice. He knew that it could not survive without a mystic base—and what it had to be saved from was reason.

"No, Kant did not destroy reason; he merely did as thorough a job of undercutting as anyone could ever do.

If you trace the roots of all our current philosophies—such as pragmatism, logical positivism, and all the rest of the neo-mystics who announce happily that you cannot prove that you exist—you will find that they all grew out of Kant." Ayn Rand

"Throughout history the influence of Aristotle’s philosophy (particularly of his epistemology) has led in the direction of individual freedom, of man’s liberation from the power of the state . . . Aristotle (via John Locke) was the philosophical father of the Constitution of the United States and thus of capitalism . . . it is Plato and Hegel, not Aristotle, who have been the philosophical ancestors of all totalitarian and welfare states, whether Bismarck’s, Lenin’s or Hitler’s."

Review of J.H. Randall’s Aristotle,

The Objectivist Newsletter, May 1963

Answer 9

Freud's Oedipus complex theory disturbs me.

Answer 10

Fear is something that we have within our ego.  It has nothing to do about anyone else.  If there is fear within, even a kitten could frighten you.

Answer 11

No need to be frightened by any philosopher or living person's words or teachings if you find they are extreme, weird or implausible. Just ignore and read more pleasant and useful stuff.

Answer 12

...none whatsoever...thanks for asking...