/lit/ - Literature

Language is a natural capacity we humans have and use in our lives, just like for instance elephants use their trunk to hold things or monkeys their tail to hang. Regular philosophy is a misunderstanding of this capacity due to an incorrect understanding of its workings, as if elephants were to think that noses in general are used to hold things, thus making the mistake of thinking that no other species has a nose. Actual philosophy is a clarification of how language works in order to avoid those misunderstandings that make us waste time and energy so we can live our human lives worrying about what actually matters.

If something aint clear feel free to ask.

Cause the important point is not the resemblances but the differences.

>pick a famous phrase by a famous man
>change it

GO!

"if a lion could speak, it wouldn't be a lion"

Hey wittgensteinians, remember how this guy undermined psychoanalysis saying that it gives us reasons pretending to give causes, that it only gives us a new myth to replace the old one, that the final cure is not something one finds there but that is constructed through the analyst/patient relation?

Well, this guy was doing exactly the same, all his "descriptions" are just new myths, are just aesthtetic (in his sense) readings of the human phenomena that are meant to replace old scientist explanations. He even said it himself, but he knew how to hide it not to be perceptible at first glance.

So, philosophers talking about language games etc. are just like the patient going out of the psychoanalyst's office, finally feeling good about himself convinced that he found the truth of facts, while he is just convinced of a new myth about them.

hey tripidiots. go to a forum and stop fucking up the threads here with ur stupid fights. i dont give a shit about who you are or what have you done here on /lit/ before. having a reputation in an anonymous board is pathetic.

why did people continue to make philosophy after him?

he just teared everything down and showed how pointless philosophy is.

>>2151735
>>2151601
i think that it is useless to prove him "wrong"
his work is not to be taken literally
these kind of "extremes" should be taken as a start point for the debate
i find his thesis really interesting

>>2151746
damn, that risks of being truth
havent read any of him
but ive got three introductory books
the tractatus and the investigations