/lit/ - Literature

>>16098581
The three pragmatists criticized theory-neutral observation, what we know as so-called 'acquaintance.' Peirce's position was that it didn't exist, and instead, there was some sort of infinite semiosis in its place. James believed our concepts imposed themselves on the world and thus determined a truth that was for us, rather than the world giving itself over to us pure. For Dewey experience wasn't merely had, it was also acted upon, again by us. Anyone who rejects theory-neutral observation replaces it with theory-laden observation or just theory minus observation as traditionally understood. The 'theory' side of thought is our concept-imposition on so-called reality. Any time you do that, you immediately open the door to relativism. And this the pragmatists did.

>>15606881
I have a master's in philosophy too and I think your list is shit.
>Kaczynski
>Evola
These people shouldn't even be on the list, but they are because you're a product of /lit/. Neither should Rand but at least you put her in the bottom tier. Even taking them out your order is fucking shit. You think Hobbes is better than Wittgenstein, Heidegger, Hegel, Marx, Descartes, Socrates, Plato, Husserl, Rousseau, Locke, Mill, Aquinas, Sartre, Russell, Rawls, Foucault, Freud, and more? What shit are you smoking dude. The only thing I'll agree with is putting Kant, Hume, and Aristotle in the top tier (and putting Rand in the bottom tier).