/lit/ - Literature

>>21281003
The problem is that 20th century philosophy is so rich and complex and there's an explosion of ideas but unfortunately nobody really has systematically addressed it in secondary literature or tertiary literature the way they have for 19th century and earlier, so you're genuinely on your own studying this stuff. And that turns off a lot of people, they're just not ready for it. Too much, too hard. But I think it's all fantastic. Yes I think there are many absolute must reads but I like hard stuff and reading everything I can. My experience is not typical.
>pragmatism
Peirce, James, Dewey, Santayana
>lebensphilosophie/sociology/early structuralism
Bergson, Dilthey, Weber, Durkheim, Saussure
>early phenomenology
Brentano, Meinong, Husserl, Ingarden
>early analytic philosophy
Frege, Moore, Russell, (early) Wittgenstein
>existential phenomenology + more
Heidegger, Merleau-Ponty, Sartre, Beauvoir, Camus, Fanon
>religious existentialism
Marcel, Tillich, Buber, Levinas
>Kyoto School
Nishida, Nishitani
>ordinary language philosophy
(later) Wittgenstein, Ryle, Austin, Strawson, Grice
>neopragmatist analytic philosophy
Carnap, Goodman, Quine, Sellars, Davidson, Putnam, Rorty, Dummett, McDowell, Brandom
>Western Marxism + other continental political philosophy
Croce, Gramsci, Lukacs, Horkheimer, Adorno, Benjamin, Bloch, Marcuse, Habermas, Arendt, Bataille, Althusser, Debord
>postmodernism
Foucault, Derrida, Baudrillard, Deleuze (+ Guattari)
>post-postmodernism
Badiou, Zizek, Sloterdijk, Agamben, Plant, Land, Fisher, Meillassoux, Harman, Brassier, Grant, Negarestani, Gabriel
>analytic political philosophy
Rawls, Nozick
>communitarianism
Taylor, MacIntyre
>revived analytic dualism + anti-reductionism
Chisholm, Chomsky, Fodor, Searle, Nagel, Jackson, Block, Levine, Chalmers
>revived analytic metaphysics and meta-metaphysics
Kripke, Lewis, Armstrong, Fine, Schaffer, Sider

If you read everything here you become god but I think 4channers will never do it. But I'm in the process of doing it. You can ask me stuff if you want.

>>17676105
Since this is a shitty jpeg quality nearly every pixel in each eye is a different color, BUT if you go check them in the color picker, all the "grays" in the yellow eye are indeed yellow/green range grays, and those in the blue eye are blue/purple range grays. You could have actually picked identical grays but you decided to fuck it up and ACTUALLY make them blue/yellow. You had one job anon.

>>14157619
Wait a minute, you didn't read Naming and Necessity yesterday when an earlier version of this thread with the same content and image got made days ago..........

>>11691587
>intrinsic and inherent mean the same thing
>therefore trinsic = herent

>there = here + some distance
>therefore t is a symbol for distance

>>9926817

>>9073540
DON'T