/lit/ - Literature

>>20224963
Sellars

>>19498831
>Emerson, Thoreau
Interesting writers, not actually philosophical giants.
>C.S. Peirce, Wm. James, Dewey
Based but still inferior the their European equivalent: Wittgenstein
>Quine, Putnam, Rorty
Great philosophers but the best parts of them are just the parts that reinforce what Wittgenstein already said
>Kripke
Complete retrograde thinker; brought philosophy backwards
>Rothbard
looooooooooooool is this a joke
>Chomsky
Not a philosopher, not really
>Rawls
Probably the best on the list in terms of influence and importance
>Nozick
No
>Dennett
Good but more of an interdisciplinary figure, a syncretist

>No mention of Davidson
>No mention of the actual best American philosopher: pic related

Not a midwit at all but I don't get analytic philosophy. Their critique is some of the most valid I've seen, yet they just can't make philosophy--and they can't write; they never make a point and their issues with philosophy seem like a gross misunderstanding, at best. I've never met someone who was not a midwit and actually enjoyed to read or found analytic philosophy insightful. Still, they're like a canceer that has infected all of philosophy today.

Any book to change my mind (unironically) ?

Short introduction to this guy? I've encountered him reading McDowell and honestly can't make much sense of his graspings and sensings and knowings, can't make sense of McDowell in turn because of that.

I'm a non native speaker anyways so that's that. Any good lecture introducing him, a good article, whatever, showing what his actual point is; not what he said and what he meant but why he has those ideas and what he's trying to do with them?

Or should I just bear through it and read his Empirical before I continue with McDowell?

I'm pretty well-read on philosophy (particularly analytic), and most of it makes sense to me, but whenever I read pic related (Wilfrid Sellars), I get filtered so fucking hard. It took me like 3 attempts to even kind of understand Empiricism and The Philosophy of Mind, and even then, barely.
Have any of you guys had a similar problem and how did you fix it (if you have)?

>So he became what doctors call a "European" drunk. He never went on binges (the "American" style). He just took it in, slowly, in "moderate" amounts, day after day, and in the last seven or eight years of his life, it was 24-hours a day. Everything he drank had alcohol in it, eventually. Since alcohol interferes with REM sleep, he often found himself awake at 3 am, and kept a bottle of gin at his bedside for just such occasions.

>>12830113
>Can someone recommend me some books/journal articles/manifestos written against scientism.
Basedboy Sellars got you covered.
http://selfpace.uconn.edu/class/percep/SellarsPhilSciImage.pdf

>>9718216
Sellars or Rorty although no one will agree with the latter. James and Peirce are also good options though

>>9605124
>forget about me, David Lewis, and Brandom anon

>everyone here falling into the myth of the given
hahahahahahaha