/lit/ - Literature

Eat my fucking ass

>>12198494
Beat me to it

>>12198494
>If you're a girl
yes, thank you for the food mommy
>If you're a guy
no, never. I'd maybe suck a dick but no man ass thank you.

>>12198506
I’m a big dirty man eating a big dirty Philly cheesesteak and you can eat my big dirty ass

>>12198510
No, I find that too epistemological

>>12198489
Yes, negative theology, "seeing" instead of "looking" and the notion of an eternal present is all very similar to Plotinus

>>12198489
logical atomism is a disease

>>12198489
Wittgenstein is a celebration in pointlessness and empty propositions.

Deleuze is absolutely on the mark and on point, the school Wittgenstein spawned are literal merchants spouting logical truisms, meanwhile look at what Deleuze was doing with Russel's logic and applying it to metaphysics, turning Aristotle upside down, extending Leibnizian notions of time and eternity. You can hate Deleuze, but no one will deny that he had a tremendous imagination to the point of madness, quite similar to Nietzsche in that regard. On the other side, what has Wittgenstein has to show for himself? Only Language games and the impossibility of communication based on completely arbitrary appropriation of Russels and Frege, who he completely misappropriated to propose empty logical propositions that propose nothing nor do they signify anything, what exactly is the truth value of Wittgenstein theory? Because even that falls under scrutiny. On this point, the whole field of modern analytical philosophy is based on a tremendous lie and misappropriation of philosophy. Whitehead wasn't talking about truth values when he was talking about nature, he viewed it as part of a whole metaphysical system, living and evolving like Schelling did. And to those who compare Wittgenstein to Heidegger, you know nothing about what you are talking about. Heidegger called philosophy the beginning of thinking, he wasn't an anti-philosopher nor did he advocate silence in the face of ontic questions, but to redefine them and transform them, Wittgenstein despite his bullshittery would be as metaphysical as Plato according to Heidegger, because he takes logic propositions to be equivalent to language. Heidegger on the other hand wanted to free language from ontology and to present it as an open field that could describe being without being caught up to theory, truth is something which is revealed not inherent in logic or a structure of thinking.

In other words, fuck Wittgenstein and his ilk, who are nothing but cancer to philosophy.

>>12199179
Cringe
Philosophy is not entertainment

>>12199308
It's not that simple.

>>12198489

THE ONE CANNOT BE GRASPED THROUGH LANGUAGE AS LANGUAGE ALWAYS BRINGS WITH IT THE DICHOTOMY BETWEEN SUBJECT AND PREDICATE AND WITH IT DUALITY. THUS ONE SHOULD NOT SPEAK OF THE ONE

>>12199308
It's art

>>12199311
No, before the 20th century philosophy was not entertainment
>>12199320
It's similar, buy art died at the beginning of the 19th century.
Today's philosophy is a form of engineering, like stoicism was

>>12198525
Epistemology is gross desu

>>12199328
Wtf is your problem

>>12199320
its not art you illiterate fucking little nigger-adjacent shitstain. art, philosophy and science are all modes of producing concepts-ideas.

>>12199331
I don't know how to express the truth in an effective way
your problem is that you're young, ignorant a bit of a faggot

>>12199344
Interestingly art, science and philosophy all died in the 20th century

>>12198489
Deleuze destroyed him

>>12199345
>me
>young
Babby you need to prepare for that despair coming your way once you've actually progressed beyond the Republic

>>12199349
Cringe

>>12199351
Based cringeposter

>>12198489
Deleuze destroyed him

>>12199347
I wish you had instead.

>>12199400
You have anger and hatred over someone you don't even know over a futile argument
Your existence is a nightmare, and I don't think you'll ever manage to wake up. If you want to, accept responsability for it and know that you are in the wrong and so are those who inspired you

>>12199347
is death not an end but a transformation?

>>12199366
What's Deleuze's argument?

>>12199413
Yes. They did transform, in fact, in a putrified corpse.
When the corpse will dissolve art, philosophy and science will come back again, when another Culture will take place.

>>12199313
based zhuang zi

>>12199420
The YouTube video is defunct, unfortunately, but as best I can tell it was part of an expansive interview with Deleuze by Claire Parnet. The relevant portion is apparently in this transcript:

Parnet says, let’s move on to W, and Deleuze says, there’s nothing in W, and Parnet says, yes, there’s Wittgenstein. She knows he’s nothing for Deleuze, but it’s only a word. Deleuze says, he doesn’t like to talk about that… It’s a philosophical catastrophe. It’s the very type of a “school”, a regression of all philosophy, a massive regression. Deleuze considers the Wittgenstein matter to be quite sad. They imposed <ils ont foutu> a system of terror in which, under the pretext of doing something new, it’s poverty introduced as grandeur. Deleuze says there isn’t a word to express this kind of danger, but that this danger is one that recurs, that it’s not the first time that it has arrived. It’s serious especially since he considers the Wittgensteinians to be nasty <méchants> and destructive <ils cassent tout>. So in this, there could be an assassination of philosophy, Deleuze says, they are assassins of philosophy and because of that, one must remain very vigilant. <Deleuze laughs>

All we can really tell from this is that Deleuze does not like Wittgenstein’s ‘programme’ of investigation, and he finds Wittgensteinians to be vacuous and anti-philosophical.

Is Philosophical Investigations worth reading?
I read Tractatus and it was just brainlet garbage.

>>12199471
starting with tractatus is ridiculous because the project is completely esoteric. pi is definitely worth reading, (and tractatus might be worth returning to with fluency in w's ideas and his retrospectives on that work)

Deleuze thought Witty was a cretin

>>12199469
the video is still available with eng subs on some other stream site, I'll try to find it again
it's unclear deleuze ever read any wittgenstein or is even talking about him. it's more likely 'wittgensteinians' refers to logical positivists (i.e. not wittgensteinians at all) or analytics in general

>>12199490
t. has not read deleuze

Deleuze destroyed him.

>>12199490
Deleuze literally had cretinism though, look at any photo.

>>12199313
i thought this was obvious to anyone, except mathfags, mathefags think their language is somehow different from all others

>>12199557
no u

>>12200249
nice nails

>>12200299

Deleuze destroyed him

>>12199179
T. Brainlet pseud that:
(1) Doesnt understand Wittgenstein
(2) Doesnt realize Wittgenstein wasnt a positivist, but was an explicitly anti-science mystic (c.f. Pretty much anything he has ever written
(3) Doesnt realize that even if positivism is wrong, it is still an extremely interesting philosophical school, desrving of serious engagment and analysis

The sheer fact that youre equating Wittgenstein with people like Carnap is evidence that you either havent read any Wittgenstein, or your reading comprehension is so poor that you entirely missed his most basic points.

Stay retarded bro.

>>12201486
Yes, the more you doubt Language the less insight you have into its alleged impotence, and the less authority you have to doubt it. The more you affirm Language, renouncing stupid quips akin to "where is the emptiness", the more insight you have into its power and its weakness.

Someone should make a virgin vs. Chad like that theoretical physicist vs. metaphysician one. Like, the virgin Wittgenspazz - cognitive dissonance so great he has regular meltdowns, assaults children for not being autistic, can only argue with anglo halfwits, etc. The Chad Jesus - embodies the word, has the best word-meaning ratio in known history, humiliates the most infernal ideologues, etc.

>>12199179
This is a legit 70 IQ take

>>12199179
You're an idiot

>>12201502
You literally don't understand Wittgenstein and deserve to be sealed in a burlap sack full of cement bricks and thrown into the Danube

>>12199311
>.

>Only high IQ will get this thread
>49 replies

>>12201502
>doubt Language
>alleged impotence
what are you talking about?
also there's no area of opposition between W and Jesus

>>12199313
>he can't even speak without introducing dualisms
What a beginner.

>>12199179
this is pasta im almost positive

>>12199313
What the fuck, this is blew my mind.

>>12199359
Cringe based poster