Analytic philo sucks balls thread

BUT LET'S BE HONEST
analytic philo is liberal bullshit.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtu.be/IEEHZdxkOfo
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

wow, you're fucking racist

Analytical political philosophy is def. dominated by liberal thought. The "let's get rid of dialectical materialism" analytical "Marxism" ultimately suffers the same fate.

lolwut. Kid, r u jiving my fuggin chicken? I am the least racist 1 here, imffo
youtu.be/IEEHZdxkOfo


Agreed. It's worrysom for the analytic tradition, imo. Quite frankly, a lot of the so-called 'idpol' ppl have been better Marxists than ppl like Chomsky.

On the continental side, specifically in most corners of post-modernism there are either a denial of antagonism (Lyotard et al.) or a displacement thereof (Butler et al.). The former is what faggots here consider "pomo" and the latter "SJW".

An orthodox and inventive approach to continental philosophy is the right one, imo. By orthodox I mean attempting to understand what Kant, Hegel, Marx etc. were about on their own terms, and by inventive I mean picking up the challenge to go beyond their impasses.

whereas continental is Marxist, anti-reality pish. Glad we can agree.

this nigger's got an interesting perspective, tbqh.
I don't agree, but I like whatchya say.

Go on, mein neger.

we're never gonna understand Hegel, for one. That motherfucker was an allen from another wurld here specifically for J. Posadas to reinterpret. THAT SAID, however, I like the idea of us *a t t e m p t i n g* to get what they said, instead of just millin' bout, spillin' our feelings in tha air. Also, nice Zizek clip.

all dat said, I like Butler and jews don't bother me :^)

why?

I dunno. I think there's some stuff in here work that can legit rile people up, for the right reasons or not. I think there's something admirable in that.

L. Ron Hubbard could "rile people up, for the right reasons or not"…

Yeah. And I think that's worth looking into why he was able to do that. That said, comparing Butler to L. Ron is kinda shit, at least one of 'em's complaining about something they t h i n k is really going on.

Why is continental philosophy so inaccessible, abstruse and at times downright obscurantist?

It's a mixed bag of reasons, largely dependent on who you're reading. Sometimes it's pretention, sometimes it's just because the author can't help but phrase things a certain way. That said, I don't necessarily think it's "obscurantist," I just think a lot of it requires interpretation and genuine engagement with the work, whether we're speaking of Zizek, Marx, or Derrida.

as to why it's "inaccessible," largely that's b/c we, at least in America, Britan, etc., are taught from a young age to internalize conceptions about the world brought to us by analytic philo. It's kinda easy to accept what they say and write off other traditions when that's really all we get exposed to.

I got a D in undergrad logic the thread.

Forgot to change my hat

arrogant stupidity, the reply.

We have never been told about the so called analytic/continental distinction in school. I had to find out that on my spare time. And no, school never gave 2 shits about the clarification of thought or verificationist critique of religion.

wew

What? You don't wanna pull a Deleuze and try to revive pre-Kantian metaphysics, user-kun? :^)

"so called analytic/continental distinction"
Now I know ya haven't read anything from either the analytic or continental tradition.

it's a true divide, not an arbitrary distinction

That was kinda my point fam

i know, fam

it's very shit

t. physics student

what's shit, exactly?

t. philo student

Daily reminder postmodernism is the inevitable conclusion of continental thought.

lol you're fucking retarded.

Smug anime reaction pics aren't arguments, continental-san.

A lot of it's been used for shitty purposes, most of it feels either incomplete or just plain stupid (see: the redundancy theory of truth, for one example). Also the fact that it subordinates philosophy to mathematics and the natural sciences instead of, y'know, letting it stand on it's own. Unfortunately, that process is slowly seeping into the continental tradition as well.

Yeah. And postmodernism isn't a school of thought, down syndrome-kun.

I missed the part where I said it was, faggot-sama.

Shudder the thought that philosophy be about what we can observe or logically prove!

Why should it be? We already have the natural sciences for that. Philosophy started off on a different course, and while empiricism has it's value, a lot of analytic philosophy is inane yammering about "the essence of triangles." Now, again, not sayin' continental philosophy's perfect, I'm just sayin' that in the grand scheme, I'd rather blow my brains out than have to suffer my way through Popper's bullshit again.

Why are you whining about "racism"?
I don't care.

I think Analytical Linguistics is pretty interesting.

Full-on silly.

lel

Continental "philosophers" need to be burnt at the stake.