[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature


View post   

File: 4 KB, 225x225, download (1).png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10767013 No.10767013 [Reply] [Original]

>Read about a philosophical concept or argument
>Author tries to explain it through a mathematical/logical structure, giving every element involved its own variable
>It suddenly becomes intensely harder to understand
why

>> No.10768548

>>10767013
Because you are either retarded or at least unversed in mathematics

>> No.10768560
File: 407 KB, 943x943, png;base6455cbd8a62feb9f0a.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10768560

>>10768548
Fuck you. How the fuck do you expect me make sense of this shit.

>> No.10768571
File: 152 KB, 644x591, 1425932463309.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10768571

>>10768560
Do I need to understand all this just to understand what zizek thinks about Gothic 2?

This deeply saddens me. I just want to read the meme philosopher and joke around with my anonymous online buddies.

>> No.10768677
File: 657 KB, 500x375, 40279956FC314AB7853E637A81FA5FF9.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10768677

>>10767013
Why are people so uneducated when it comes to math

>> No.10768688

>>10768560
>trying to understand Lacan

>> No.10768692

>>10767013
You're a brainlet, Harry.

>> No.10768695

>>10768560
What is this shit supposed to mean

>> No.10768722

>>10767013
>giving every element involved its own variable
>It suddenly becomes intensely harder to understand
you can only hold about 4 variables in your working memory at a time, too many moving parts. (source well known in psychology but I picked it up from Thinking Fast and Slow...I think)

break it down into parts, write it out and test yourself if you actually need to memorize this stuff if not read on

>> No.10768729

>>10768560
>>10768695

Any book that talks about the graph of desire will walk you through it.

That is the final graph which is built up in four stages. It’s not so difficult if you follow it as it goes. Zizek explains it is SOI, and I’ve seen it laid out in more detail in other Lacan introduction

>> No.10768730

Some formal logic would help you out with contemporary philosophy, certainly. But it's not *that* widespread. You should learn it for its own sake anyway.

>> No.10768749

>>10768560
on second look

$ => i(o) => o then a clockwise AND an anticlockwise path to s(O) without clear labeling...either there is a difference which is not explicitly stated or he is duplicating paths, or its a rube Goldberg (you knew it'd be the jews fault in the end)

>> No.10768795

>>10768677
Because the basic math that its teached in high school lacks the "meat" other subjects have, most people never get past the abstraction wall, not just because some are not intelligent enough to get it, but because to get to the meat of it you need to go through mindless mechanic repetition that turns people off. This could be corrected with the intervention of a good teacher, but even most high school teachers don't get beyond the mindless mechanic repetition understanding of math.