Is philosophy just obscurantist word salad? I haven't read any philosophical works, but if I just misuse philosophical terminology or speak in an esoteric way, I bet I could slay pussy because to the general public, the difference between legitimate philosophy and meaningless gibberish would be imperceptible.
>Trying to criticize philosophy
>"I have never read any"
What's your problem, why did you even make this post? Off yourself please
>>69792839
You're not wrong. It's just that good, genuine philosophy is difficult to sort from the garbage for the uninitiated.
>>69792839
No.
Anything post-modern is utter garbage. Foucault and Derridas fucked it up with word salad and denying reality exists.
Aristotle, Plato, Popper, Locke, Hobbes, Schopenhauer, Nietzche are all clear and engaging writers. Modern thinkers like Rawls are good, too.
I suspect you're really wondering if philosophy is good for anything else. Not really. It's good if you're interested in the questions philosophers are interested in, but it won't help you in the rest of life.
>>69792936
The language of philosophy is notoriously esoteric for the public. After hearing Zizek speak a couple of times, I became curious about what he was saying because all he did was name drop and use strange psychoanalytic language. After doing a little research on Lacan, I still couldn't grasp what any of his theories mean. I have come to conclude that philosophy is a big fraud. Science is a rigorous academic field, yet there are pop sci TV shows that make concepts easy enough for little children to understand; philosophy's inability to engage the public doesn't prove its rigor, it proves its vacuousness.
>>69792839
then you would be a charlatan. If you haven't got a problem with that knock yourself out but you'll be in competition with all the other charlatans.
Philosophy is the pursuit of Truth, the genius isn't in the method, it's in knowing when to stop looking.
Stop reading 4chan and go read a book.
Zizek is a prime example of continental philosophy which, imho, is akin to poetry in many ways because it's so nebulous and uses equivocation to such a degree that the reader is left to come up with their own meaning (which may or may not be useful)
What you're after is Analytic philosophy, which is the philosophic mainstay of the Anglosphere.
It's just that post-war philosophy is much too politicized to be of any relevance and ends up way too circlejerky atleast in the traditional institutions
>>69793321
Modern ethics is a branch of philosophy and is highly engaging.
For example, should we support abortion.
The problem is more that interesting ethical questions are politically controversial and ethics experts don't get interviews.
>>69792839
>I haven't read any philosophical works
why are you asking this question then, you silly sheep?
>>69792839
It mostly is. I gave up on philosophy. There is good philosophy which tells the truth, and then there is bullshit and the constant debating from assholes. Guess which there is more of?
Another shitskin from Toronto complains about the world of the white man which he lives in because he's too dumb to be able to get a handle on it.
>>69792839
>the difference between legitimate philosophy and meaningless gibberish would be imperceptible.
Well, continental philosophy like derrida, nietzche, satre, heidegger, zizek and lacan, yes.
But Analytical philosophy like Wittgenstein, Bertrand Russell, Quine, Rawls and Mackie is a completely different beast all together.
>>69793566
ethics isn't about what's morally correct, Ethics is about what is *permissable*. Do you appreciate the difference?
>>69793944
look at Wittgenstein's clear and consise "Tractus logicus philosophicus" it's like 75 pages and basically feels "mathematical" and is all about being comprehensive and logical. It's likely the shortest IMPORTANT philosophical work. It pretty much changed the whole field of philosophy for a while.
Here is a excerpt (the numbers refers to what he is defending. 5.61 is a defense of 5.6):
“5.6 The limits of my language mean the limits of my world.
5.61 Logic fills the world: the limits of the world are also its limits.
We cannot therefore say in logic: This and this there is in the world, that there is not.
For that would apparently presuppose that we exclude certain possibilities, and this cannot be the case since otherwise logic must get outside the limits of the world : that is, if it could consider these limits from the other side also.
What we cannot think, that we cannot think: we cannot therefore say what we cannot think.”
And then read something like heidegger from his book "being and time".
“Why are there beings at all instead of nothing? That is the question. Presumably it is not arbitrary question, "Why are there beings at all instead of nothing"- this is obviously the first of all questions. Of course it is not the first question in the chronological sense [...] And yet, we are each touched once, maybe even every now and then, by the concealed power of this question, without properly grasping what is happening to us. In great despair, for example, when all weight tends to dwindle away from things and the sense of things grows dark, the question looms.”
>>69792839
This board fucking sucks. Kill yourself you actual homosexual.
>>69794031
FYI dude Wittgenstein disavowed the Tractatus in his later works. If you haven't, read Philosophical Investigations. It's a brilliant refutation of the idea that language is a purely logical construct.
>>69793944
Continental philosophy has a very specific set of definitional structures just like analytical philosophy.
Only idiots and non-philosophers think that you can just "say gibberish" and be respected. And those who fall for shit like that are fucking non-philosophers. Usually people pushing agendas rather than ideas.
>>69794031
Wittgenstein disavowed the Tractatus in his own works. Philsophical Investigations are much more concise and clear and able to be applied to a living world, rather than a vacuum which Tractatus needs to exist in.
BA Philosophy here, and I'd say that philosophy is like a ferry that you use to get across a wide river. Once you get to the other side, you don't need the ferry any longer, and trying to carry it with you across the land on the other side is a fool's errand. On the other hand here I still am answering questions about philosophy... lol
>>69792839
yes, it is, mostly
it started with Aristotle deciding that the more useless a subject was, the more it should be explored
>>69793981
In philosophy both terms means the same.
Formally, "ethics" is the branch of philosophy that addresses questions about justice and morality. Thus, one could also label that branch "moral philosophy" and still refer to the same.
There is no difference in your claim. What is morally correct and what is "permissable" is the same thing.
>>69794340
>>69793321
>I have come to conclude that philosophy is a big fraud
like economics
>>69794031
>“5.6 The limits of my language mean the limits of my world.
>5.61 Logic fills the world: the limits of the world are also its limits.
>We cannot therefore say in logic: This and this there is in the world, that there is not.
>For that would apparently presuppose that we exclude certain possibilities, and this cannot be the case since otherwise logic must get outside the limits of the world : that is, if it could consider these limits from the other side also.
>What we cannot think, that we cannot think: we cannot therefore say what we cannot think.”
sounds like grade c bullshit
>>69794416
>philosphy major
enjoy your no job/teaching job/barrista job, faggot
>>69792839
Philosophy only turns into this sort of thing when very intelligent philosophers try to rationalize their early childhood traumas, i.e. religion, statism and some other superstitious nonsense.
>>69792839
might makes right and the only thing I really know is I know nothing
That is all of the philosophy you need
>>69794187
>It's a brilliant refutation of the idea that language is a purely logical construct.
I know, but the tractatus is obviously made by a genious even if he found problems with it later.
>>69794340
>
Continental philosophy has a very specific set of definitional structures just like analytical philosophy.
>Only idiots and non-philosophers think that you can just "say gibberish" and be respected.
Sure, but you have people like Lacan who willfully tried to be as obscure as possible. You could read ONE sentence by lacan like:
“I think where I am not, therefore I am where I do not think. I am not whenever I am the plaything of my thought; I think of what I am where I do not think to think.”
And it looks like gibberish even to educated philosophers, you have to REALLY spend time and know what he means by "I" and "think" and "plaything" to understand what that sentence even means. If a continental philosopher just spews gibberish then most people don't have time to really understand it. Look at this other Lacan quote:
“I am there where it is spoken that the universe is a defect in the purity of non-being.”
I have read tons of philosophy, I have no idea what any of that means. Or what about this shit:
“Meaning is produced not only by the relationship between the signifier and the signified but also, crucially, by the position of the signifiers in relation to other signifiers.”
I know what signifiers and signified entails, but what does this sentence mean? It looks like gibberish.
>>69793321
>the whole field must be fake because I can't understand it!
off yourself please
>>69795011
2deep4u
>>69794611
>sounds like grade c bullshit
What? Why? It is a perfectly clear and a logical argument. You anti-intellectual fool.
>>69793106
> but it won't help you in the rest of life.
It's not like engineering or medical sciences where you gain applied knowledge of a number of subjects, but it'll help you think critically, organizing and finding patterns of thoughts, which will make you better at your day job, or discussions. Indirectly it'll help considerably.
>>69792839
Modern philosophy is basically a bunch of nonsense because it has no basis in any superior order.
>>69795317
I used to think that, but I noticed SJWs and social science grads are the worst critical thinkers I've ever seen outside of fundamentalist religious nuts.
Exposure to philosophy courses does not help you recognize bad logic. It just indoctrinates you with a huge helping of identity-politics BS.
>>69795011
>
“Meaning is produced not only by the relationship between the signifier and the signified but also, crucially, by the position of the signifiers in relation to other signifiers.” I know what signifiers and signified entails, but what does this sentence mean? It looks like gibberish.
It means the brakes on a car only function AS brakes when connected to wheels; tires; the drivetrain; and so on and so forth. Without being installed in an entire automobile, they have no function. Sort of like that Sagan quote, "To bake an apple pie, first you must have a universe."
>>69795246
what's the 3 most important things philosophy has taught you? that pure logic couldn't
>>69795491
>"To bake an apple pie, first you must have a universe."
how profound
>>69795011
You posted some very simple stuff, actually.
I think when most people talk about "gibberish", they think about made up words, things like dasein or the like. But what you posted is all pretty definitionally simple and can be mostly taken at face value.
As for the first quote, just cut it up into parts and apply logic signifiers to each thing.
The second one is more peotic prose than actual philosophy, but I understand the meaning. Non-being is the base state, which the universe deviates from.
The third phrase is 100-level philosophy tier.
Signifier means literally signifier. An object that means something than what it actually means.
A meme, if you will. And Signified is the thing the Signifier is referencing. The meaning behind the meme, if you will. And these memes are not just effected by the meaning behind the meme, but the "board culture" around it. Thus you get things like cross-over memes. Is that more in a form that you can understand?
>>69793321
Exactly the same happens in hard sciences too, there are for example two brothers (whose names I forgot) who got Dr/Prof titles with a complete mumbojumbo bullshit thesis on something like astrophysics just because the language of it is "word salad" as you say and no one can prove right or wrong what you suggest.
>>69794031
>The limits of my language mean the limits of my world.
This already sounds wrong though, without knowing the context.
>>69795183
No other professionals or academics take as much pleasure in the use of jargon as philosophers. Many people who are passionate about a subject will happily try to explain concepts to a lay person because it's what the love and they want to share their enthusiasm. I do it with my occupation, and it's one that is notorious for pretentious language (architecture). It seems the only thing philosophers are passionate about is drawing the distinction between philosophers and non-philosophers.
Philosophy is for white people who cant into Physics or Mathematics. It's pleb tier historical political science. The goals of philosophers are to look at the world and come up with contradictions, then sell those contradictions as factual, so leaders can control a population with ideas.
examples:
>No God
Because there is no room for church in the state ideology. People will die for their beliefs, much better if they believe in nothing.
>Mind and Body
There is only your body of which your mind is a physical part.
>Aesthetics
Do you really need someone to tell you what is beautiful?
>Ethics
Or not to steal or murder?
>Logic
Cannot prove anything it hasn't already defined as the proof.
>Epistemology
Humans learn and adapt, because they have the capacity for growth.
A small child can tell you what their limited experience of the world is, then i f you question them more, you notice their innate capacity to extrapolate and exaggerate beyond their direct experiences. It's common in humans of all ages and sizes, to fill in the blanks rather than say I don't know. We like to guess and approximate, this is present even in our biological systems. That same small child could tell you it's obvious there's a God because everyone has a mommy and daddy, and that food goes in his tummy and ideas go in his head, that you should share your toys and be polite, that some people are ugly and some are pretty, that learning is fun but there's a lot of stuff that's mysterious and only grown ups know about..
Is there any surprise there exists a giant historical and ongoing bullshit guessing game for intellectual midgets? The use obtuse language to hide the fact that it's all been rehashed to death since the Ancient Greeks and Chinese.
>>69792839
>Is philosophy just obscurantist word salad
no
but zizek is
he's a faggot, a 50+year old man that still has the special snowflake syndrom, fuck him
>>69792839
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sokal_affair
it was already done and tricked a lot of people. However, it only works with Postmodern idiots.
>>69795609
>Exactly the same happens in hard sciences too, there are for example two brothers (whose names I forgot) who got Dr/Prof titles with a complete mumbojumbo bullshit thesis on something like astrophysics just because the language of it is "word salad" as you say and no one can prove right or wrong what you suggest.
Are you talking about the Sokal Affair? This mathematician wrote a paper that was published in some "critical thinking" journal that was gibberish. He did it as a way to prove how the social sciences misappropriate scientific terminology.
>>69795661
Well, it depends m8, sometimes it's really difficult to express something abstract... I had your same thought, but you cannot explain something that is inherently complex with a simple language without losing depth.
>>69792839
What is the benefit of these ethereal philosophies?
logic, self-reflection, making an impact on the way you want things.
You are central to You and live within the confines of physical reality.
Zizek pushes convoluted ideas but Realpolitik is what rules, always.
>>69796105
It depends, it might help you achieve something or you are simply looking for more knowledge and love reading/learning. When it comes to politics, philosophy is a MUST imo... It strengthens your values and ability to reason and eventually win debates.
Philosophy or Quantum Physics?
Which is better?
>>69796339
What are you looking for? What would make you happier? If you're a non-believer it won't change much after you die... It's mere masturbation, what does make you cum?
>>69796339
well we understand neather very well i guess its just prefrence that seperates are indulgences ...do i get any pussy yet?
>>69795661
but if you go back far enough theysimpilygo from one point to another to create a logical argument its like maths with words (words=ideas)
>>69795504
Upper level philosophy is logic , and maths. They have a lot in common. Ignore the intro to philosophy bullshit you assume is philosophy's and talk to a PhD scholar or professional, you might be surprised what they work on.
>>69795680
use maths to describe how bueatifull a sunset is or how honest someones opinion is maths has its drawbacks
>>69796339
quantum physics is just theoretical physics (which is pure applied mathematics) and material physics (which is fun experiments with lasers and nanomachines).
You will need to specialize in order to make a living, and the only way you get there is by having a high GPA as an undergraduate and then following a research project for your post doctoral thesis that really makes you excited. Unless you're bright a hard worker or already dedicated to studying physics from an early age, you won't get anywhere.
As a philosopher on the other hand, you can just fluff your professor as an undergrad to get a cushy stipend to write a dissertation on anything vague and unquestionable, then you can piggy back that into writing popular books about controversial topics or writing manipulative speeches for politicians. Effort required almost zero, just be a massive ass kisser and party a lot so you meet the right rich people with the publishing, political and business connections that will set you up for life.
>>69794416
But how are you going to pay for the ferry ride when you're $45,000 in debt?
>>69796995
I like the idea of nanomachines better
It's useless in the real world.
If you're asking what the tangible value of reading philosophy is, then you only have to look at the "professional philosophy readers", who are competing for $30k to start at colleges with 6-figures in debt for their masters or PhD, but which many are going to be working at Starbucks a good while while they wait for the old losers holding those jobs to die, so they'll be writing boring bullshit on blogs for a while.
In short, it's a luxury, maybe less frivolous than other luxuries like reading shitposters here, but the system under which we live today does not give much credit to wordy bitches for what matters in terms of power, i.e. getting money, the desire of the opposite sex, etc.
>inb4 a bunch of virgins who have resigned to MGTOW jerkoff4ever talk about how they've managed to overcome the biological imperative to solve the sex issue, and are also happy under the rule of Mom "ree wagecuck!" until she dies.
>watching le snorting man
PURE IDEOLOGY
>>69796843
>what's the 3 most important things philosophy has taught you? that pure logic couldn't
can you not answer the question? at least be honest, you have no reputation to defend here
>>69797238
I think Big Boss and the Amazing Technicolour Dream Coat might be right
>>69795317
This is just a meme
Philosophy doesnt "teach" you to be critical. You can only become critical by yourself.
>>69797238
Boss, do people have to learn the art of war in colleges and academies or is fighting for NO JUST CAUSE enough to learn?
>>69797408
how simple it is to blow my own mind
that i could learn my entire life and end up more confused than when i came into this world
that ultimatly the only questions i apply philosiphy to are fuking enormous
>>69797238
Nothing is useless. Even shit can give birth to a flower. Becoming famous or influential thanks to philosophy might be against its principles, but it's definitely useful.
>>69795609
>>69795926
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bogdanov_affair
>>69797720
>Even shit can give birth to a flower
No it can't
>>69797720
>Nothing is useless.
Okay, Jews. Go.
>>69792839
The philosopher Karl Popper revolutionized how we view the scientific method. He basically btfo'd Sigmund Freud. He coined the term "pseudo science" just to describe Freud's bull shit.
>>69797536
and a fourth that my shit wont be appreciated for another few hundred years
>>69798149
Pretty much everything taught in modern psychology classes is pseudoscience. I had to take two semesters of that garbage, and it's still loaded with Freud (for some stupid reason).
Most of it is speculation. Some of that could be agreed with like the behaviorism stuff, the bobo doll study stuff is probably somewhat accurate with kids wanting to beat the shit out of a doll after watching adults do violent stuff, but the whole theories that little girls want to blow dad or they wish they had a cock is all fucking nonsense.
People just want autonomy and power, that's it.
>>69797238
You don't know what you're talking about.
I work as a psychotherapist, and philosophy greatly influences and informs my practice.
Some people are crippled by a lack of meaning, others are deeply discontented from their lives as a result of not understanding themselves/society/the universe. Some people are unable to face the realities of life because they've allowed their worldviews to become so rigid that change is an impossibility for them, and they're left hopeless.
What is the point in putting food on the table, a roof over your head etc, if you're left with a life without truth, meaning and contentment? What are you doing any of it for exactly?
Philosophy is about exploring truth and meaning in the world.
>>69798398
>I work as a psychotherapist, and philosophy greatly influences and informs my practice.
That's not saying much. I went to a shrink one time and she tried to "hypnotize" me. You are a charlatan informed by charlatans.
>>69792839
Pretty much.
most people are stupid drones.
>>69798398
How do they train you to provide people with answers to those questions?
Or do they just train you to help people learn to live with not knowing the answers?
>>69793321
Philosphy isnt fraud, but a lot of frauds attempt it.
Its not magic, its simply ideas, thats all.
>>69798134
Learn how to exploit your enemy, faggot. Making use of 'useless' things is what makes you 'smarter'.
>>69798398
>I work as a psychotherapist, and philosophy greatly influences and informs my practice.
Wow, it's like a uroboros of fucking useless jobs right here.
> What is the point in putting food on the table, a roof over your head etc, if you're left with a life without truth, meaning and contentment? What are you doing any of it for exactly?
Survival instinct. Anything else is self delusion.
> Philosophy is about exploring truth and meaning in the world.
No it isn't. Philosophy's managed to show that there's no such thing as either truth or meaning.
Ignoring the rest of this argument, I'd just like to add that statistically, Philosophy majors have the highest LSAT scores out of literally every major in America. I.e., is you go philosophy you're almost guaranteed a cushy law job.
>>69798646
>No it isn't. Philosophy's managed to show that there's no such thing as either truth or meaning.
Are these the same faggots who ruined art by saying its subjective?
>>69796843
come on bro, at least give us something
this guy >>69797408
at least made an effort
we can't judge you after this thread
show us the power of philosophy
>>69798646
False, philosophy, depending on the branch still questions reality. What even is reality? What if survival instinct is a delusion? What makes it better than killing yourself? These are some of the questions modern philosophy addresses.
>>69798646
>philosophy managed to show there's no such thing as truth or meaning
That is objectively bullshit. Truth or meaning may not have an extrinsic value but they sure as fuck have an intrinsic value. Especially since one of the most commonly held views is that knowledge = Justified, TRUE, belief.
>>69793321
>I don't get it therefore it's a fraud
>a fucking leaf
>>69798340
Not all psychology is pseudoscience. It's the abnormal psych that's all bullshit. You can't test the theories surrounding abnormal psychology using the scientific method as it would be amoral (can't test the effects of being molested as a child as that would require a scientist to molest a child, etc). All you can do is use case studies to attempt to prove a point, and case studies are absolutely terrible evidence of anything as their are far, far too many variables for it to be reliable.
>Abnormal psych is pseudo science, but something like the psychology surrounding advertisement is legit.
>>69798398
>psychotherapist
>psycho the rapist
>>69798398
>What is the point in putting food on the table, a roof over your head etc, if you're left with a life without truth, meaning and contentment? What are you doing any of it for exactly?
so what are the ansers that you found?
>>69798530
>That's not saying much. I went to a shrink one time and she tried to "hypnotize" me. You are a charlatan informed by charlatans.
Mate, you know nothing. Because one therapist tried hypnotherapy on you doesn't mean that's what I or every other therapist does.
I practice CBT alongside other modalities tailored to fit my practice. Just because you went to a chinese herbalist doesn't mean you know all doctors.
>>69795609
>This already sounds wrong though, without knowing the context.
But that's the thing, there is no rational argument against it, you can not come with an example of some part of the world that you can not explain with language. This is a statement about philosophy, he is explaining the full context which CAN be discussed.
>>69795491
>It means the brakes on a car only function AS brakes when connected to wheels; tires; the drivetrain; and so on and so forth. Without being installed in an entire automobile, they have no function. Sort of like that Sagan quote, "To bake an apple pie, first you must have a universe."
Oh well, he could have said it in a easier way
>>69798149
>He coined the term "pseudo science" just to describe Freud's bull shit.
When I read Popper I can distinctly remember that he did it to describe Marxist history as bullshit.
>>69798743
err this guy >>69797536
>>69792839
>I could fuck anybody, if I just weren't ehtically pure
Ant this, children, is how you spot a man lying to himself!
Look at him, look at him and laugh!
>>69793106
Foucault isn't postmodern and makes perfect sense, anyone on this board would agree with what he said if only theyd actually read it
>>69799004
>I practice CBT
Cock and ball torture?
>>69798830
>What even is reality?
DURRRRR
>>69792839
Philosophy is actually about carefully defining terms. Maybe you should try reading some before making assumptions about it.
>>69799004
>Because one therapist tried hypnotherapy on you doesn't mean that's what I or every other therapist does.
The fact that "hypnotherapy" is even considered reputable at all is telling about the legitimacy of your profession.
One of my majors in university was in philosophy. I wouldn't call much of it bullshit, although some philosophers are really bad writers and take too many pages to explain simple concepts.
Also, lots of people hate Foucault ITT, but I suspect that they haven't read his stuff. He was more of an extension of Nietzsche, if anything, and his works are pretty apolitical. If anything, Foucault uses more citations and paints a more accurate picture.
>>69799004
>CBT
cock and ball training
>>69799000
Sir, you are playing a game with us. The game is, "I don't believe philosophy has any value, and I will create an objection to anything you say." Now, of course, you're perfectly free to play that game. But I do have to ask what motivates you to do so?
>>69799132
so what are the three most important things you learned from philosophy?
>>69793059
PRetty much this. The cultural marxists took over and now most philosphy departments are focused on promoting cultural marxism and shitting on anything that isn't karl popper, verificationism, or marxist.
>>69798830
Bunch of garbage.
> What even is reality?
Meaningless question.
> What if survival instinct is a delusion?
You can no more control eating when you're hungry than you have a choice over giving your wallet to a mugger with a gun.
There's no such thing as free will in a deterministic universe.
> What makes it better than killing yourself?
Nothing. But killing yourself is not necessarily better than continuing to live.
> These are some of the questions modern philosophy addresses.
These are all ethical questions, showing how poor the contribution of the rest of philosophy is.
>>69795317
Weird cuz in my experience the more interested in philosophy people are, the more full of BS they are.
>>69792839
Just because you are too stupid for philosophy, it doesn't make you a fucking philosopher to philosophie about philosophy.
>>69799220
it's wrong to ask for the answers that this man has found through his use of philosophy? indeed any such questioning is somehow immoral, or just a game?
what answers have YOU found?
I admit I may look for irrationality in your, and others, answers, but I fail to see how that is ethically wrong
if you found something important, thenit should be unnasailable
>>69792839
I dig Seneca. His approach is very concrete and practical. Reading him you can realize that even in ancient times they tackled with same problems we deal today. For some reason we dont teach for people this kind of practical things.
>>69792839
The only thing philosophy has done since science has most of the universe figured out is go 'you can't prove objective proof exists :^)' then masturbated about post modern garbage using critical theory (IE everything you know is shitty and evil: the theory)
>>69799370
>deterministic universe
Woah there buddy, that's a real big word for someone who doesn't care about reality. If you'd like to define philosophy as uninteresting because everything that people look at just doesn't matter to you, go nuts - but don't say that philosophy is utterly useless, and then use your opinion to back that up.
>>69799143
>The fact that "hypnotherapy" is even considered reputable at all is telling about the legitimacy of your profession.
The NHS offers acupuncture and Homeopathy. Does that mean you're gonna stop going to your GP from now on? Does that mean all medicine is bullshit?
>>>69798646
>Wow, it's like a uroboros of fucking useless jobs right here.
Sure man. Sorry, where did you study again? I didn't realise you were qualified to have such a strong an opinion on this. Doesn't stop the rest of 4chan though, so don't let it stop you.
There's a lot of really solid evidence for the efficacy of certain modalities of psychotherapy. Cognitive behavioural therapy especially.
So is any philosophy actually worth reading or just skip it.
>>69799370
>Meaningless question
No, it does have a meaning, we cannot answer. Should we stop looking for an answer? What if it could lead to further comprehension?
Same for all the points. And also, why is our society centred on survival rather than suicide? If both have the same value, why one of those points prevails? This question might lead to further studies: sociology, politics, ideologies and even neuroscience.
And our society is solely based on ethics, without ethics our society wouldn't function. The large impact philosophy had on society it's a testimony of its value.
Most of the ancient philosophy won't help now because most of it got replaced by modern sciences, but studying it does help a lot, especially as a /pol/ack and if you want to BTFO normies.
>>69799537
I only read good honest honorary Australian philosophers
>>69799370
1.so Ur opinion m9 i quite like posturing over existence hence philosophy
2.hunger strikes that end in death
3.dont see ur point here
4.moden philosiphy aint the best but we not ready for next level shit in this climate of ideas
>>69797238
Are you that guy from that one thread about "biggest redpills" a week amd a half ago? Pic related
>>69799788
It's worth it and might help you to understand ideologies, ethics and politics in general. Don't both if you don't like learning or reading.
>>69799370
also that deterministic stuff (i whole heatedly be-leave btw) IS philosophy
>>69799443
Personally, what I discovered is a love of, and need for, IRrationality. Spending so much time studying formal logic and technical fallacies and so forth showed me that no SYSTEM of thinking can encompass the human experience. It's vogue nowadays to be a Platonist, and to believe that math is a pure truth about the universe. It's not, it's an invention; it's not discovered it's created, and it can only illuminate a certain set of things at a time. Imagine the world as a complicated theater set. Which lights you turn on illuminate different portions. Depending on the color of the light, different parts of the set are backgrounded and different parts of the set are foregrounded.
I write computer code at work (a skill closely related to formal logic) so it's not like I'm ignorant of logic or math. But I think the irrational part of the human animal has been treated ignorantly by most modern academics. Our irrationality is the wellsping of our passions, arts, and politics. I find that oftentimes people make irrational decisions for irrational reasons, but then try to cover it up after the fact by inventing a rational justification. I think the irrational must be brought back into its place as the rightful bride of the rational, instead of hidden in a darkened basement at every opportunity.
A world without the irrational is the Hell of the Demiurge.
>>69799855
>>69799996
Math is a language you use to interpret an event. Math is an invention, what you study or try to predict through science or math isn't. The fact that we call it 'atom' rather than '32n4r4' doesn't mean the atom itself is invented.
The fact that math is able to make accurate predictions disproves that argument.
>>69792839
All words, all concepts, exist and were invented by the human mind.
They have no objective reality. They are invented tools.
Which is fine, until we make the mistake of thinking they have an objective reality, and that we "discovered" them and have to "uncover" their meaning. That is when you get the schizophrenia called Philosophy.
For thousands of years men debate the True Meaning of terms like Justice, Fairness, Truth, Knowledge. They debate as though the terms had objective meaning, when they are merely inventions of the mind and therefore mean whatever we define them to mean.
The Buddha understood this fact thousands of years ago. It took thousands of years for Western philosophers like Stirner and Wittgenstein to finally wake up to this truth which has been known in the East.
Nearly all philosophy is therefore frivolous and based on the error of granting external legitimacy to manmade inventions.
The only philosophy worth engaging in is pragmatic philosophy, something which will impact your life and your behavior in a direct way, for the better.
Everything else is useless psychological masturbation.
>>69800393
What is that? Some rainbow pride flag?
Philosophy is LITERALLY EVERYTHING.
if you don't have a sophisticated and complete grasp on philosophy then you are wasting your time on earth.
I am a PhD Physics candidate who graduated at 35 because I interrupted by physics studies early on and spent the first 6 years of my academic career down the rabbit hole of philosophy.
I meet people all the time at the top of their fields in math, engineering, CS, bio, psych... You know what they all have in common at least a basic grasp of philosophy and understanding of its importance.
You know what the greats in those fields have in common? a deep understanding of philosophy.
No it's not useless. it's literally the foundation of all intellectual pursuit which is in turn the foundation of all human achievements.
The scientific method is a philosophical proposition not a scientific one.
>Is science just obscurantist word salad? I haven't read any scientific works, but if I just misuse scientific terminology or speak in an esoteric way, I bet I could slay pussy because to the general public, the difference between legitimate science and meaningless gibberish would be imperceptible.
>>69800424
There is nothing - nothing at all - guaranteeing that what is commonly accepted as the "laws" of the universe won't completely change an hour for now. The truth of mathematics is relative to the whole world.
A hammer can be used to, ah, hammer in a nail. Is a hammer true? Is it false? That's the wrong kind of question. I think math is like a hammer. It has useful applications but asking if its the standard-bearer of some kind of metaphysical reality is asking too much of it.
>>69800393
Love your posts anon. Also nice flag
>>69800592
The flag of Seychelles
>>69800588
Yeah, but most people think it's completely useless, that's the problem, but as you said, pragmatic philosophy can be quite useful.
And somehow, people are still hooked to psychological masturbation, meaning some of us NEED it and since the denial of an objective truth, calling it useless is pointless. What is useful? Who says it's wrong to study it? It's a nearly endless lop.
>>69799776
>Sorry, where did you study again?
you can't have an opinion without me approving of you're school
>>69799788
sounds like mostly bullshit to me
>>69799808
>why is our society centred on survival rather than suicide?
what an asinine question
>>69799996
>Personally, what I discovered is a love of, and need for, IRrationality.
why?
thanks for the answer though
>>69800603
so tell us the three most inportant things philosophy has taught you
>>69800751
>Is a hammer true?
kek
>this thread
>>69801142
You just
what the fuck?
he literally explains exactly why he's interested in irrationality, just read the rest of the fucking post
>>69800751
Wait man, math doesn't only define what a hammer is, giving it a definition is a human requirement to understand its interactions; it's like war, you cannot engage something you haven't identified and you don't even know is there.
Math knows a thing called hammer is there and that it behaves in a specific way, therefore we adopt mathematical language to translate that interaction so that we can understand it.
>>69792839
>I haven't read any philosophical works
Most modern "philosophy" is subjectivist bullshit
Socretes, Aristotle, Rand, etc deal with reality and logic
Before you do anything else. You have to learn how to think.
>>69801142
what are the 3 most important things that science have taught you bro?
>>69801487
>Rand
Nice, 7/10 bait
>>69792839
you are correct
I have read a little bit of philosophy but have met LOTS of douchebag retards at university who think their degree means shit, they use what they think are "big words" to try to intellectually exclude you from conversations when really they know fucking nothing about the world at all and are literal cringe worthy pea brains trying to be Carl Sagan
>>69801142
Why is it asinine?
>>69800588
you're a fucking retard and if you truly believe that, then why did you type all that out in an attempt to "prove" its objectivity?
a man is diagnosed with random spasms
I am not
we are both in a room
I am asked to hit him, he is asked to hit me
I hit him, and he does nothing
1 hour later, the man goes into spasms and all of his limbs move around, including his fist
did that man just move his fist because he was trying to punch me, or because he was having a spasm?
>>69801342
I've seen men who couldn't multiply 9 and 9 without a calculator wield a hammer quite effectively.
>>69801142
Why do we need irrationality?
The answer is irrational, so I doubt you'd find it satisfying.
>>69792839
>Is philosophy just obscurantist word salad?
If by philosophy, you mean 95% of humanities fields, the yes. That's postmodernism for you. They're frauds and no one has the balls to call them out.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OzrHwDOlTt8
>>69801547
nice rebuttal
>>69801640
I think the one on youtube was removed, but here's a mirror on vimeo.
https://vimeo.com/118188988
>>69799000
>so what are the answers that you found?
That's like saying to doctor "So how do you cure people?". How long is a piece of string?
I'll give you a recent example. I practice different modalities as a psychotherapist. One such modality is Existential psychotherapy, which is the philosophical school, (but philosophy informs the others to a lesser extent).
One of my patients was wracked with guilt to the point they couldn't function, so we discussed the concept of guilt from a philosophical perspective.
One such perspective I presented them with was the idea of 'The sensitive dependency on initial conditions' which basically is the effect whereby minor variations in initial conditions can drastically alter the resulting conditions. It demonstrates the sheer complexity of Causality; a complexity far beyond human reasoning, perhaps even to an infinite degree. We’re incapable of accurately predicting the myriad repercussions of our actions and because of this we have very little control of our lives.
If we cannot accurately predict the full repercussions of our actions, then we feel guilt as a result of a very short sighted misunderstanding of reality.
This viewpoint resonated with my patient and helped them move forward. It's an example of how philosophy can help expand your mind to find new ways of framing your existence, when old ways of thinking damage you or leave you in the dark.
postmodernism exists to make mentally and physically small men feel powerful
>>69801637
Yeah of course, but understanding how a hammer works can be 'useful' on a larger scale, because its principles apply to other fields, sure, the guy who couldn't multiply 9 and 9 without a calculator won't need that, but others will... Also, bringing up that point is out of context as our subject was establishing that math do hold some truth and not how people can live or perform basic tasks even without math.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f1siWHmKV5c
>>69801321
HURR, I STUDY PHILOSOPHY TO LEARN THAT PEOPLE ARE SOMETIMES IRRATIONAL
as if no one knew that already
>>69801524
I dunno, this is a thread about philosophy
but I suppose, genetics, causality, creation of all elements by stars
>>69801551
several reasons, mainly, it's a pointless question. we are survival oriented
if we were suicide oriented we would have died out long ago
>>69801619
no one knows
>>69801637
>The answer is irrational, so I doubt you'd find it satisfying.
irrational? not rational? aberrant, crazy, foolish, insane, ridicuolous, stupid, unreasonable, WRONG
>>69802071
>as a psychotherapist
aaah, a psuedo-scientist
>This viewpoint resonated with my patient
doesn't mean it is correct, or rational
> and helped them move forward
they were propelled in the direction they were looking in? what does this even mean? "move forward"
>>69799776
>Sure man. Sorry, where did you study again? I didn't realise you were qualified to have such a strong an opinion on this. Doesn't stop the rest of 4chan though, so don't let it stop you.
Seems that one got under your skin.
>>69802071
so there aren't 3 thing you learned through philosophy that you rate as important? except for the ability to fool your patients into not feeling guilty?
>>69802371
Yeah and again, we are survival oriented, but why? And no, I am not looking for the 'it's biology' answer as our brains can efficiently go AGAINST biology, nature and all their laws. Having established that there is no truth to hold, why does our society still value life over death?
>>69802371
Congratulations, you spotted the erro... wait, it's not a fuckin error if the guy is responding to your exact question. Maybe you should stop being a little bitch and start using your brain?
>>69802216
I find your anthropomorphism of mathematics en toto to be interesting. "Math knows a thing called a hammer is there[...]" In my opinion, math doesn't KNOW anything. People are the sort of thing that can know things, math is not.
I don't think math can "hold truth," either. This is the sort of sloppy language that good philosophy is attentive to. It seems to me that you're begging the question (ie: accepting the point under contention as true as the basis of your argument) by creating sloppy metaphors like "math knows..." and "math holds..."
>>69802440
>except for the ability to fool your patients into not feeling guilty?
What is there to feel guilty about when we're incapable of knowing the full repercussions of our actions?
Do intentions alone make something justified? Back to philosophy we go to explore those ideas...
>>69802371
B.A.S.E.D
>>69802440
>>69802545
this is what the post modernists have done to people
they have made people think that philosophy belongs to a special academic intellectual club, philosophy belongs to the people.
All philosophy is equal whether it is a taxi drivers passing thoughts or one one of Alan Watts detailed lectures,
fuck these word salad cucked niggers trying to convince the goyim they aren't qualified to philosophy
Any thread on philosophy is bound to attract the autistic fedoras.
This one does not disappoint.
>>69802707
Math can be used as a method of finding an objectively correct answer. Mathematics, on its own, has inherently justified concepts - you can't use complex maths without first accepting that basic maths are correct. It functions as both as a set of beliefs and a framework for those beliefs.
>>69802371
Philip K Dick reminds us, "Sometimes the appropriate response to reality is to go insane."
You are of course perfectly free to disagree. But I think by dismissing the irrational, you're dismissing a fundamental and inescapable part of your own humanity, and that will leave you vulnerable to demagogues and a pseudo-rationalism that merely papers over the irrational part of yourself.
>>69802707
Language is one of our limits, expressing what I meant in that specific circumstance is rather difficult and that's not because English isn't my first language.
Using the words "math knows" is indeed wrong (that still doesn't disprove the argument if it's expressed badly), let's say math AKNOWLEDGES the hammer and attempts to understand it's functioning... From this perspective, math isn't directly TRUTH, but rather a reflection of TRUTH.
>>69802929
That's how logical positivism fell flat on its face right out of the gate. It can't prove its own premise, and thus falsifies itself. Math is based on UNPROVABLE premises. This is fine for an intellectual tool; C++ is based on unprovable premises. This only starts becoming a problem when you expect math to carry your metaphysics on its shoulders.
>>69802946
>Philip K Dick reminds us, "Sometimes the appropriate response to reality is to go insane."
Sounds like Philip K Dick was a plagiarist then.
>>69802864
>they have made people think that philosophy belongs to a special academic intellectual club
Never said that, I am againt intellectual clubs most of the time although they can be useful. Also saying philosophy belongs to the people =/= the people can understand specific fields or reasonings within philosophy.
>>69792839
I bet I could slay pussy because to the general public, the difference between legitimate philosophy and meaningless gibberish would be imperceptible.
change "slay pussy" to "suck dick" and you'd be right
>>69803118
Math is not an agent, and it cannot do ANYTHING. People can do things using it.
>>69802545
>Yeah and again, we are survival oriented, but why?
because all life is? and we are life?
do you really spend your time thinking about such pointless bullshit? did you come up with an answer?
>>69802701
you didn't quote me faggot, so I don't know what the fuck you are referring to, newfag
>>69802707
omg, you're actually insane
is there nothing useful you learned?
>>69802824
sounds like you are helping your patient by tricking them
what does "move forward" mean to you?
>>69802864
>they have made people think that philosophy belongs to a special academic intellectual club, philosophy belongs to the people.
exactly
>>69802946
>leave you vulnerable to demagogues and a pseudo-rationalism that merely papers over the irrational part of yourself.
just sounds like you wanted to use some fairly complicated words to impress how much cleverer youconsider yourself than us
>>69802946
>Philip K Dick
tha scifi author? that's who you quote to back up your philosophy?
>>69803138
>That's how logical positivism fell flat on its face right out of the gate. It can't prove its own premise, and thus falsifies itself. Math is based on UNPROVABLE premises. This is fine for an intellectual tool; C++ is based on unprovable premises. This only starts becoming a problem when you expect math to carry your metaphysics on its shoulders.
aaah, I got it, you learn how to say nothing meaningful with several long sentences of big words?
>>69803453
>Math is not an agent, and it cannot do ANYTHING. People can do things using it.
stating the obvious
>>69803560
See, you're playing the game "Object to everything I say" again. Of course there is no argument at my disposal that can beat that game, because you will object to any I make. I just don't think that's the most productive language game we could be playing.
>>69803338
if you have to go that far out of your way to understand something then it's quite likely that it has very little value to anyone outside of nit picking discussion
anyone with an IQ over 100 should be able to understand a well explained concept, if not then it's probably only good for being nit picky
>>69803560
I asked you an answer different than 'it's how life is' or 'it's biology'... I am asking you, given the fact we can go against life and nature, why we still value society more.
>>69803453
Good point, does that change that through it we can see a portion of reality/truth/somethingdifficulttodefine? Through mathematical language we understand things that are simply there. Stating it's an invention is obvious, but it mustn't be misunderstood with: "what math analyises is a construct of our minds".
>>69803747
The Philosopher is immunized against all dangers: one may call him a scoundrel, parasite, swindler, profiteer, it all runs off him like water off a raincoat. But call him a Philosopher and you will be astonished at how he recoils, how injured he is, how he suddenly shrinks back: “I’ve been found out.”
also, quote the text you want a response to, newfag
>>69793321
>science is a rigorous academic field
>not knowing advances in epistemology is what made science as rigorous as it is
>>69803747
someone knows his wittgenstein.
>>69803866
not quoting? jesus, teh newfags are out in droves today
>>69803789
Why does it need to have a value? Do you know that discoveries or decisions made in a small club can affect a larger portion of people?
The humanities are a waste of time.
>>69803866
>I am asking you, given the fact we can go against life and nature, why we still value society more
did you find a pointless answer? or do you specialize in pointless questions?
are you trolling? if so, I rate you 5/10, good job
>>69803992
if it doesn't have value then IT DOESN'T HAVE VALUE
yes I do, it's called elitism, big government, federalism, cultism, take your pick
>>69803991
Can't be bothered to.
>>69803915
I've been here since sourdough breads came flying onto the shelves and UNITINU was poised to conquer the world. I post about once a year and can't be bothered to remember the markup.
>>69793321
>a communist Yugoslavian pretends to be a intellectual. Obviously, all philosophers must be like Zizek and spout bullshit.
>>69804089
You are yet to define what pointless means :^), it's an endless game brit.
>>69804190
For some people it does have a value, but let's assume it doesn't... So what? What are you trying to prove?
>>69797238
Good to see you, Boss O7
>>69804328
>You are yet to define what pointless means :^), it's an endless game brit.
you have yet to answer my simple questions, is that what philosophy is about? ignoring simple questions and trying to get others to answer your questions?
>>69804205
and you don't quote people you are replying to?
disgraceful
>>69804194
t philospher
>>69800588
That would include (and I agree) gravity, wave (as a noun, not the verb), field, etc. All reifications
>>69804597
Brother, you are doing philosophy this same moment, whether you like it or not. We're on the same boat, I asked questions you keep ignoring. OP's question, and your questions are wrong, because usefulness can be everything and nothing and the same time.
>>69802371
Reminder that this Brit is an example of average /pol/ user who considers himself "redpilled".
>>69804328
if like you said something has 0 value, that means it has 0 value
so quit trying to word salad me into thinking abstract bullshit that means nothing is anymore than mental masturbation
>>69804498
Congrats, you managed to get that proxy working this time.
>>69792839
Is theoretical physics just obscurantist word salad? I haven't read any theoretical physics works, but if I just misuse theoretical physics terminology or speak in an esoteric way, I bet I could slay pussy because to the general public, the difference between legitimate theoretical physics and meaningless gibberish would be imperceptible.
>>69800603
>The scientific method is a philosophical proposition not a scientific one.
That's an extraordiary claim (that's not even falsifiable).
>>69799996
well said m9y
>>69804866
>If like you said something has 0 value, that means it has 0 value.
You have proved nothing, congratulations. I would say you wasted your time, but perhaphs you enjoyed it.
>>69797238
>>69797238
>RARE
RARE
>RARE
RARE
>RARE
>>69792839
Old school philosophy is real and very interesting. They use big words to describe complex ideas but they have deeper meaning because of it. Kant in particular is kind of dense but well worth it, and I'm sure his words are even more precise in German due to the exactness of their grammar and compound words. Post-modern stuff is meaningless word salad at best and cancerous garbage at worst.
I had to take a mandatory philosophy class about Ethics as part of my general education and it was one of the few humanities classes I actually enjoyed. It helps a lot if you have a good instructor to reliably guide you through the material without bias. My professor was Canadian so I was worried it would be yet another leftist propaganda class but luckily he was a true old-school philosopher and kept his politics out of the discussion. The first two weeks of lecture were him systematically annihilating moral relativism on every level which was based as fuck.
>>69804785
>usefulness can be everything and nothing and the same time.
thanks for proving how retarded philosophy is
>>69804802
fuck off kike
>>69805272
Honestly 99% of /pol/ users would hugely benefit from a basic Ethics course.
>>69805319
>retarded
Why?
>Is philosophy just obscurantist word salad? I haven't read any philosophical works
>189 posts
>>69805618
because it does exactly what is happening here, fucking kikes getting into meaningless war of words instead of going out and taking a walk, building something, spending time with people
something of tangible value instead of elitist cuckery
>INB4 "DEFINE TANGIBLE VALUE"
>>69805778
Bruuuuh, stop calling things meaningless, telling people what to do. You don't know shit, you can't even define the words you use, why getting in argument no one can handle? As for the last part, everyone does whatever he wants, this thread is full of shitposters and trolls anyways.
>>69792839
>people are stupid
Wow! What an interesting philosophy.
Come over here anon so I can suck your benis
>>69805543
I was forced to take a basic Ethics course in university.
It was literally the worst class I've ever been in, and had the dumbest teacher I've ever seen.
I would try asking very simple questions and rebuttals, and her eyes would just glaze over, and then she'd say some shit like "yep, that's right!" and then move on.
Of course they trotted out Ayn Rand as the devil of Ethics because all she cared about was "selfishness!" and treated any form of egoism as basically fascism.
When I tried to explain the actual thought process behind "everyone is selfish" as an IS and not an OUGHT she just looked at me baffled again and went on saying our goal shouldn't be selfishness.
>>69799996
Well said, the people on these boards are retarded.
>>69805990
hahaha I just exposed one of the word salad crew
>philosophy isn't elitist
>you don't know shit!!!!
>you can't even define the words you use!
I assume readers have a decent understanding of English sorry Mario
>you can't handle me in an argument!
word salad kikes keep going until you run out of energy and then think they win, despite arguing that it isn't about winning or losing
go fuck yourself you Iberian crossbreed nigger
>Italian
>white
>>69805618
because the questions you ask are pointless, you never work out the answers to them, which would be pointless
then you want to get into a discussion about what pointless means
and none of you have even attempted to tell me the three most important things philosophy has taught you
>>69806318
>not understanding the whole concept of meaning is a construct
>thinking I said you can't handle me in an argument when I CLEARLY said no one can, not even myself for it's meaningless, it's a dumb question and there is no truth to establish
This is why people need philosophy or school.
>>69806392
No, there is no pointless, figure that out and then I'll be more than happy to tell you you're right, as of now you cannot answer OP's question and are just waiting your time, using philosophy too.
There is nothing to teach, nothing to be taught of, it's not word salad, it's basic reasoning. Also, your question is misleading, a man might only need one important thing instead of three. A whale is bigger than three grains of salt.
>>69806125
>Of course they trotted out Ayn Rand as the devil of Ethics
Ayn Rand isn't a devil, she is just plain wrong about everything.
>>69806870
>YOU AREN'T AS INTELLIGENT AS ME! MY SUBJECT SHOULD BE TAUGHT AS A COMPULSORY SUBJECT!
prove to me a whale is bigger than three grains of salt after all the cuck bullshit you where just crying about nothing being based in reality
this is what you people are
elitist hypocrites doing the kikes work for them
>>69792839
Here's the problem that philosophy has run into:
1000 years ago, philosophers were employed by kings who were often less educated than the philosophers themselves. Because they had to keep their tenure and not be executed by angry kings who thought they were being one-upped, philosophers had to work their hardest to keep things simple. Additionally, most philosophers were also NATURAL philosophers, or who we would consider scientists today. Their knowledge of the world constantly changed, but generally they tried to stay humble (except for Newton and Galileo. They were total dicks to everyone and thought they were God's gift to the world)
Now, for philosophers, this trend generally evaporated once universities became widespread. There, philosophers could study without worrying about being executed by jealous kings, and as a result they became increasingly pretentious and useless. A few good ones still remained, whose works were actually critical for the foundations of political, economic, and scientific theory, but most became absolutely useless.
So yes, you're basically right. MODERN philosophy is an obscurantist word salad that basically means nothing in most cases. CLASSICAL philosophy however, including Nietzsche, Kierkegaard, Kant, Marcus Aurelius, Augustine, etc. is very much an intellectual field that has contributed a lot to the world. Aristotle's works, as much as I despise him with a passion, helped create most modern prose theory, especially with his Aristotelian Triangle of pathos-logos-ethos, which basically DEFINES modern prose.
>>69807246
You should read this. It's short, digestible, and may quiet you down for long enough to hear what other people are saying.
http://acc6.its.brooklyn.cuny.edu/~phalsall/texts/taote-v3.html
"
Nan-in, a Japanese master during the Meiji era (1868-1912), received a university professor who came to inquire about Zen.
Nan-in served tea. He poured his visitor's cup full, and then kept on pouring.
The professor watched the overflow until he no longer could restrain himself. "It is overfull. No more will go in!"
"Like this cup," Nan-in said, "you are full of your own opinions and speculations. How can I show you Zen unless you first empty your cup?"
LOL my captcha was about tea....
>>69807246
Bro you aren't even trying anymore, read what I said and aknowledge it. I stated above I am not trying to be an elitist whatsoever, yet you go back to that claim. Stop putting words in my mouth.
>>69807421
more than familiar with Zen, I enjoy reading philosophy recreationally
i'm just trying to prove to Mario that it is abhorent to turn it into a club of elitist goons who think they are intellectually superior to everyone else because they dance around ridiculous abstracts and deliberately make their ideas hard to understand for people
>>69806870
you can't give me the most important 3 things philosophy has taught you?
>>69807639
I only need one.
>>69807592
I am against elitist clubs (pt.1337) and you can't prove shit because YOU think something is abhorent. Do you get it?
So, what does /pol/ think of Zizek's communism?
>>69792839
>I haven't read any philosophical works
Also Žižek is completely understandable if you finished High School, he's one of the most comprehensible philosophers out there.
>>69799132
When you do it right, philosophy is this.
>>69793321
>I can't understand Žižek
Holy shit what?
Post the video you didn't understand, I want to see this.
>>69799788
Well it depends on what interests you.
>>69792936
Fpbp
>>69794420
>In philosophy both terms means the same.
Yet another reason why philosophy is useless.
>>69795926
Read 'Fashionable Nonsense'.
Philosophers aren't just misappropriating scientific terminology. They are abusing it to lend credibility to themselves and make their works even more obscurant. They abuse scientific terminology to further their fraud agains the public.
