Let's put in a Montaigne in there
MONTAIGNE!!!!
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=WLAtXWaz76o
Okay, Where would you like him? Maybe the guy who took the photos (I'm too lazy to find his name)? Certainly not creepy teacher guy.
Maybe i'm wrong but Senzaki and Tatsumi are for me examples of Id vs Ego in the Freudian theories (copypaste from wikipedia)
Id -
"The id "knows no judgements of value: no good and evil, no morality. ... Instinctual cathexes seeking discharge—that, in our view, is all there is in the id." It is regarded as "the great reservoir of libido", the instinctive drive to create—the life instincts that are crucial to pleasurable survival. Alongside the life instincts came the death instincts—the death drive which Freud articulated relatively late in his career in "the hypothesis of a death instinct, the task of which is to lead organic life back into the inanimate state."For Freud, "the death instinct would thus seem to express itself—though probably only in part—as an instinct of destruction directed against the external world and other organisms" through aggression. Freud considered that "the id, the whole person ... originally includes all the instinctual impulses ... the destructive instinct as well",[17] as eros or the life instincts."
Ego -
ts task is to find a balance between primitive drives and reality while satisfying the id and super-ego. Its main concern is with the individual's safety and allows some of the id's desires to be expressed, but only when consequences of these actions are marginal.
To overcome this the ego employs defense mechanisms. The defense mechanisms are not done so directly or consciously. They lessen the tension by covering up our impulses that are threatening.[25] Ego defense mechanisms are often used by the ego when id behavior conflicts with reality and either society's morals, norms, and taboos or the individual's expectations as a result of the internalization of these morals, norms, and their taboos.
Upon the highest throne in the world, we are seated still upon our arses -Montaigne
I don't think Montaigne has appeared though. He laughs at other philosophers for being so complicated and snobby etc and preferred the modest simple life
I got that. I even got that you may find me complicated and snobby--but if I enjoy seeing philosophy in yaoi, who does it hurt? So if you want to bring him in, you would have to show me how he applies.
You could certainly see it that way. :)
Oh no no no no. I didn't mean to sound that way XO. It's perfectly okay to see philosophy in yaoi. The lawl was just cos it was refreshing. I was just saying that there is no Montaigne yet cos of the current character profiles. Most of them are like potatoes, Complex and starchy
The otaku club could be an epicurean commune lol
Sorry. :) I am really just wasting time here waiting for an update. I don't mean to sound touchy. The epicurean commune idea is funny.
Once in the Finder comments, I asked "Latin scholars" for the correct plural of penis. I got answers. I love yaoi fans.
Now that I think about it, this is a valid application to the overall theme. :)
Montaigne could apply. the readers ,observing and commenting on the behaviors of the participates in this drama.
Montaigne is more like a defender of us - blockheads :)
And since complex and starchy vegetables are good for health we are making conclusion that the characters of Caste Heaven are healthy :D
The main philosophy of yaoi - if your dick is not working..go read Plato ;)
Plato lol. Montaigne found him a little more than boring. (Tis a fact).
Coincidently He had a study (theory) on impotence too.
Coincidentally*
Have I mentioned my theory that typos are philosophical? Perhaps that "a" was seen as the shadow on the wall of a cave or something?
Or maybe the A was impotent? There is a lot of pressure at the end of a word, you know.
Some comments Kiss made have me thinking about the characters philosophies, so I thought I'd lay out my ideas here.
I agree that Karino is Machiavellian in a "it is better to be feared than loved" way.
I think Azusa has an Objectivist approach with his own happiness as the moral purpose of his life (if we can define his happiness as including taking down Karino/making Karino acknowledge him). This realization made me pause because I love Azusa and hate Ayn Rand, but What can I say? Azusa is a lot hotter than John Galt.
Senzaki seem to me to most closely follow Nietzsche, if we replace Nietzsche's love of the military with the Yakuza. He's a lion among lambs --romantic, passionate and extreme.
Right now, Tatsumi is more akin to Kierkegaard, who shared some existential elements with Nietzsche, but ultimate argued for choosing the greater good (e.g. society or religion) over love. Mind you, Kierkegaard continued to wine about the love he sacrificed for the rest of his life and she influence pretty much everything he wrote, but he gave her up. I think at this point, Tatsumi has "infinite resignation" though his duty is to family and not God (Kierkegaard was into God).
Atsumu seems like a happy Rogerian humanist--seeing the good in people and self-actualizing once he feels secure, stopping only when his emotional needs are not met. Lets hope he can develop unconditional positive self-regard, even if Kuze later tries to undermine that in order to "protect" him.
Kuze seem kind of utilitarian to me. Not so much the smarmy manipulative aspect of him, but the way he explains the caste system seem to reflect the greatest good for the greatest number. I'm going to pair him with Jon Stuart Mill who wrote about liberty but then said, "Despotism is a legitimate mode of government in dealing with barbarians."