/lit/ - Literature

Maybe

Philosophy should die

>>13123883
The philosophy department in the University of Sao Paulo s a literal dsytopic place to be in. It's crumbling and falling apart. I talked to one of the students at his last year and he straight up told me "Don't major in philosophy. You will regret it."
lmao

>>13123912
>Philosophy should die
How so, anon?

>>13123859
Maybe it’s just in transition to a new form and we don’t recognize it

50%.

>>13123918
Nah, I think we pretty much know what philosophy is. It ain't gonna revolutionize itself like you're suggesting.

>posts a poll to find out if philosophy is dying instead of writing a thoughtful argument encouraging discussion

>>13123926
>>13123916
>yea its dead lol
give an argument so people can take you seriously

>>13123933
I didn't say it's dead. I said it's dying, it's not on the stage of being completely defunct but it ain't that alive and well. Go to the nearest philosophy department you know and tell me what you see isn't straight pseudery and a ton of continental talking shit and actually discovering shit. I mean, you might not like her, but even Contrapoints was pursuing a PhD in Philosophy and she realized there's nothing really new to discover. If you pursue a Master's in philosophy, you will probably be writing an incosequential paper on some relatively unknown author's idea and how it actually connects to anthropology or something but that doesn't really amount to anything, you get me? I love philosophy and all, but what the hell are we gonna do at this stage in which it's already so well-developed?

>>13123945
Not an argument.

>>13123916
Philosophers try to answer questions that probably don't have an answer. We have been playing this nonsense game since the Greeks.

>>13123951
>Not an argument.
It actually is an argument. I'm not saying that it isn't a worthwhile pursuit and that philosophy doesn't have a right to exist, but at this point in academic philosophy, what new is really going on? Going to a philosophy department is just depressing, I should have stayed at home reading books.

>>13123962
>Philosophers try to answer questions that probably don't have an answer. We have been playing this nonsense game since the Greeks.
Yeah, it's basically this but it's really bad nowadays. I mean, back at least in the 18th to the end of the 20th Century new things were being discovered in philosophy and all but at this point it has mostly reached a stalemate. Kinda like art after abstract art. The amount of brainlets and pseuds in philosophy departments is just fucking astounding holy shit.

>>13123859
How come the votes went from a resounding NO to a majority YES, lmao?

>>13123859
Philosophy can't die because it's a fundamental human experience like breathing or fucking

>>13123945
>>13123970
>Philosophy doesent mean anything to me so therefore its pointless
You can't be serious can you? Have you read any philosophy? Do you understand how important philosophy is in this day and age with society being at is most critical yet at the same time the most sensitive? Maybe YOU don't see a point to it, and maybe YOU don't see the worth in it, but thats YOU. Are you aware of Max Stirner's prediction of the Paris attacks not even that long ago? What about (although this guys a meme) Peterson's blazing free speech claims that have effected Canada's judgement hugely? What about all the futurist/acc coming out of nowwhere with a.i. and Elon Musk and technology flying high sky as of date. What about Uncle Ted and his anarchist writings? No, he has yet to have anyone follow in his footsteps but the sheer fact we have what he has said in mind is a matter of great importance. Have you look into antifa and the fact that the Government is freely allowing Anarchist Riots to roam the streets to please the public? What about journalism and its affect on public figures more than ever?? France riots? What about the migrants from the East and huge Nationalist movements?

Aslong as problems present themselves in a logical/moral/reason/ or in a sense that can't be solved at all immediately philosophy will always exist. What you are referencing to is academic philosophy which desu is not even dead AT ALL. You are falling for to standards of your country because France has been producing many great works and a ton of philosophers over there are taken as seriously as traditional ones and although academic philosophy is restricted to academic philosophy in a-lot of particular matters, you have to understand when people present their philosophical discoveries to committees/clubs/seminars/private orgs.(which you should no sense your so acquainted with the academics) its not only "philosophy" people there. If you've ever been to one of these events there are people involved in Mathematics/Sciences/Biology/CS/Psychology like philosophy has made great way in Biology and Science recently and YOU would know that if you knew what you were talking about. And this is only academic philosophy who the fuck says philosophy has to be involved in academia for it to be philosophy? Philosophy's Morals and Ethics have never been more in debate except in todays times especially with LGBTQ and the Liberal mumbo-jumbo. I hope you know Philosophers dont jerk off all day and get invited to talk to people that want to learn they get invited to talk to Political figures all-the-time. Also are you aware of the Philosophy of Technology that has brought out Eastern Philosophy to debate the rise in technology?

Dude, I can go on for paragraphs

>Also Linkola was huge in Finnish media and has a bigger presence here than Finland now

>>13124047
>Philosophy can't die because it's a fundamental human experience
I agree, but then I look at the philosophy department and I start to lose hope.

>>13124049
Political science and political thought have to be thought of as being their own thing. The fact that philosophy influences them marginally one way or another does not change the status of philosophy as of now. The fact is that, as time has passed, philosophy has been increasingly losing its importance in political science until it became its own thing. The fact that there is some influence instead of just being the major factor shows that philosophy is not as great as it once was.

All those political ideas and comments you just mentioned are something different and are not what I'm talking about. Plus, the fact that philosophy is so popular mainly in France (and a lot of so-called "philosophers" have capitulated on this and invented a ton of bullshiterry and pseudry, believe me) goes to show that it's not something that global and does not exert its influence over the whole world, and only focuses on some parts of the World. Plus, most of the time that philosophers are invited to give comments to a certain politician it's always some meme pop-speaker.

Look, what I'm trying to say is that philosophy isn't what it used to be. I love philosophy, it's my favorite topic and if it were up to me, I'd read philosophers all day, but by looking at the state of things, it's completely decadent. It isn't at all what I expected back then. It's just falling apart at this point and philosophy isn't at that stage where there is so much more to discover. Like I said, it's like visual art. There's nothing wrong with liking art and studying it, but you gotta admit that it has grown to a point where, even though it's deeply important to some of us, it just doesn't have that much to evolve (look at abstract art and blank paintings. They try to revolutionize but there's nothing that hasn't been done yet).

Cont.

>>13124049
>Philosophy doesent mean anything to me so therefore its pointless
That's a big strawman, I literally never said that. I think that you just got offended by what I said and you made this wall of text against me. I get what you say though, you still value philosophy a lot and I really respect that. But I never said that I didn't like philosophy either. I basically only study philosophy in my free time and this is why I'm so worried about where it's headed. Sure, there are some new elements being discovered but these are very few and between, and in my country philosophy is, unfortunately, not respected at all. It's dying academically and it shows. That was what I meant in my initial post, anon.

>Have you look into antifa and the fact that the Government is freely allowing Anarchist Riots to roam the streets to please the public? What about journalism and its affect on public figures more than ever?? France riots? What about the migrants from the East and huge Nationalist movements?
Most of this will probably just be commented by a total pseud way by Zizek or some bullshit and nothing will be solved lmao.

>>13123945
>If you pursue a Master's in philosophy, you will probably be writing an incosequential paper on some relatively unknown author's idea and how it actually connects to anthropology or something but that doesn't really amount to anything, you get me?


Probably but do you think that wasn't the case in earlier centuries ? The eras of "star philosophers" were few and short-lived. Mot of philosophy's history have been autist arguing with (and past) each other for way longer than necessary.

Just look how much time and ink Augustine, a genuine good writer with actual philosophical flair, spent engaging in the manifold barely relevant controversies of his time. Look how much of the Divine Comedy, perhaps the greatest work of literature since Antiquity, is spent on btfoing random florentines that nobody would even care to remember if they weren't in the book ?

And that's just talking two of the most widely-read people ever as examples. I'll let you imagine how it is for 13th century Franciscan scholar n°432.

>>13124110
>Look how much of the Divine Comedy, perhaps the greatest work of literature since Antiquity, is spent on btfoing random florentines that nobody would even care to remember if they weren't in the book ?
I mean, I'm pretty sure they must have been a big deal and of much importance to the writer at the time lmao, so he just made sure he got his point across.

>>13124110
>I'll let you imagine how it is for 13th century Franciscan scholar n°432.
Yeah, but you're talking about the Middle Ages where literally everything and every academic subject was shit. Philosophy was probably held in much higher regard in the 19th and the 20th Century and sure as hell the philosophy departments weren't filled with as many pseuds and crumbling in infrastructure, nor druggies lmao.

>>13123859
Postmodernism was seemingly the endgame and no one has moved past it yet so it feels like everything has been
ered when it hasn't since people still have questions. Maybe >>13123945 that is right and we are asking questions that will never have answers but to say the question is allowed to be unanswered is a ridiculous notion because if you looked people will have different opinions in this very thread and so warrant more thinking.

>the questions are still being asked but there aren't any (well known) players or philosophies at work in the world.
>>13124049
>Elon musk
>Peterson
Are Pseuds, if that is the level we are at now, I weep and you should too. Maybe there are too many pseuds in academia and they are all working on inconsequential papers and not developing anything.
In that case, hand it over to hobbits- god knows you don't need to be a professional philosopher.
Why don't we find this then?
Maybe the world is too focused on science and atheism and any attempts to go beyond that box is simply too hard for the average person.

>>13124150
>Yeah, but you're talking about the Middle Ages where literally everything and every academic subject was shit.

Someone hasn't studied their history. Philosophy was extremely important and well-respected in the Middle Ages. And it wasn't shit by our current standard, certainly not. Middle Ages thinkers paved the way for the scientific method, analytic philosphy and even formal logic in a sense.

>>13124153
Elon Musk isn't a pseud.

>>13124160
>he thinks that studying philosophy in the middle ages was a good thing and a good place for free-thinking
lmaoing at your lyfe

When will you stop using strawmans?

>>13124094
disagree entirely political thought and political science has its roots in reason of the individual thinking that reason or your morals is not philosophy is ridiculous. Also, i'm not saying philosophy is only prevalent in France, thats only an example its been pushing tons all over Europe and America has tons of hyped up individuals coming up without Academia at all as they are opposed to it, this goes to Canada as-well. Even the C.E.O of buzzfeed is a theorist. China has again huge waves making way in philosophy of technology and philosophy of media influences

I think you are only speaking of Philosophy of Academia and even so you do not bring a single thing I said to light in a manner of fact but rather your opinion. Ill dissect your post for you.

>Political science and political thought have to be thought of as being their own thing.
This is objectively wrong, the intro. classes to these courses in any uni would pertain huge debates and discussion on reasoning(i.e.Rhetoric,Reasoning and even logic) Also lawyers as you know take philosophy courses.
>The fact that there is some influence instead of just being the major factor shows that philosophy is not as great as it once was.
So it gave birth to a hugely important social structure? see above for this^
>All those political ideas and comments you just mentioned are something different and are not what I'm talking about.
You don't mention any specific thing but just say "its something different" not an argument but rather a lack of one.
>that global and does not exert its influence over the whole world, and only focuses on some parts of the World
What exactly do you mean by this? Of-course philosophy doesent reach to the african tribes that have been living by tradition for years through circumstance but its not that fact of the influence of it-which is still hugely strong- its the fact that everything has its roots at it.
>Plus, most of the time that philosophers are invited to give comments to a certain politician it's always some meme pop-speaker.
This is a ridiculous subjective opinion, a speaker is a speaker and even if its some meme shit this still ables political figures to continue to contact important philosophical figures. Also the speakers choose to be contacted are not memes but rather professors at top universities just from the sheer esteem and appraise. Before you tell me professors at top universities are memes, there not if you understood what it took to even get into one of those schools to teach you would understand. You have to have huge amts research done its ridiculous.
>*Your whole last paragraph*
All subjective views on an objective topic and actually i think you dont like philosophy the way you think you do. Your projecting your opinion that philosophy is dead either through envy,misinformation,hatred or some other fallacious reason. No one that has read philosophy seriously has an opinion like yours. It sounds like nothing but pure and disgusting
>cope

>>13124174
>>13124049
>Mentions stirner
>Mentions France
>Pic of stirner

based egoist

>avatar fagging and name fagging
Uh oh

>>13124174
>This is objectively wrong, the intro. classes to these courses in any uni would pertain huge debates and discussion on reasoning(i.e.Rhetoric,Reasoning and even logic) Also lawyers as you know take philosophy courses.
lmao cope. Philosophy serves a pedagogical purpose in these courses. They would be what Wittgenstein purported philosophy to be, not to "result in 'philosophical propositions', but rather in the clarification of propositions... Its task is to make them clear and to give them sharp boundaries."

When I studied political theory they would bring up all the time books by old philosophers like Hobbes, Machiavelli etc. but they are just there in order to give a good understanding of what poltical thought is about because back then it wasn't separate from philosophy. But not in order to make us discover new philosophical ideas but simply to introduce us to political theory.

>So it gave birth to a hugely important social structure?
It did. Cicero, if I'm not mistaken, said that philosophy was the mother of all sciences, but eventually a mother has to die too and her offspring take her place, you know?

>You don't mention any specific thing
Non-political philosophy.

>What exactly do you mean by this?
Philosophy is one of those academic subjects that sadly, are underregarded in some places and more well-regarded in others. Take all of Latin American institutions and you will not find a single one good philosophy department. I can bet money on it. All you'll find will be either stoners or pseuds, I guarantee you.

Your last paragraph was simply ad hominem and strawmans. You literally have not read what I said correctly about my opinions and my feelings towards philosophy and you were clearly offended by it. One's feelings towards an intellectual topic are of course, subjective by nature, and people will choose what to study and major in depending on those feelings. The fact you didn't realize this shows me how ignorant you are of what I said.

>Your projecting your opinion that philosophy is dead either through envy,misinformation,hatred or some other fallacious reason.
Wrong, it's through my objective assessment of the current state of philosophy.

>>13124203
It's not avatarfagging. It's a painting.

>>13124174
Plus, I didn't say it was defunct yet. Read here, >>13123945 pseud. It's not dead yet but on the process of dying.

>>13124212
It's obvious we can't come to an agreement so lets leave it at that. Agree to disagree. I do however hold that their is no such thing as a objective opinion because everything is subjective unless directly rooted in the laws of nature,time,space, or sensibility.

My opinion is right because it is mine.

>glad i had a good discussion

>>13123859
two words:

REI KOZ

>>13124221
> I do however hold that their is no such thing as a objective opinion because everything is subjective
The absolute state of Stirnerfags lmao

>>13124235
>namefagging & avatarfagging(yes it is avatar fagging even if its a picture)
the absolute state of /lit/


>anyways don't throw insults out when i genuinely learned from a-lot of what you said and im glad i did.
now fuck off cunt

>>13124246
Hey, you are also avatarfagging as Stirner, fuck you.

>>13124217
i dont see how philosophy can die as long as people are interested in it. well keep having new problems to investigate as society and technology develop alongside eachother, as long as we experience more history and trauma and want to interpret it. saying that philosophy is dying is like saying painting and sculpture are dying. and if they do itll because a better alternative arose that answers that need better.

>>13123926
its funny how your confidence in philosophy's achievements is what leads you to the conclusion of it's downfall.

mastery of the brush didn't leave rothko or picasso stumped, so why would lofty achievements by philosophy invalidate the discipline.

and the way you've been interested in framing philosophy as a scientific discipline that can run out of things to uncover makes me think you are missing the real power of writers like nietzsche, levinas, habermas, derrida, and especially heidegger. i dont know if the analytic side is having this problem, but from a continentau perspective the idea that you can run out of material is very out of left field.

>>13124212
Posting the a picture of the same thing in multiple threads is avatar fagging, newfaggot

>>13124212
also, with regards to politics:
>who is arendt
>who is habermas
>who is kant
>who is rawls
>who is nozick

it's become something totally distinct from its classical "self." would you guys consider social theory or semiotics to be philosophy? they're the only zones in which healthy debate and original work seem to be appearing

to me, the work of habermas is the epitaph of (much of) modern philosophy. everything conjectural and unfalsifiable in the academic world seems to have fallen into the "philosophy" basket, along with everything we're still calling 'continental' in form. this is why probably why more judgmental readers seem to dislike it so much. a miserable little set of rhizomes indeed. this is the most pseud post i've ever made on here btw

>>13123916
>>13123916
>brazil
KYS

>>13123859
it's dying on /lit/ for sure

>>13123859
Dumb question. As long as you breathe there will always be your particular way of doing something.

>>13124212
The reason political science talks about political philosophy in a descriptive sense is because political science doesn't engage in rational discussion. Current Political Scientists simply believe in Utilitarianism, Egalitarianism, liberalism, and whatever else is demanded of them by trends. The rest of the questions are hows and whats. This is what happens when deeply philosophical things are purged of philosophy. In American Pol Sci, for example, most of what is studied is the description of modern democracy. What if you disbelieve democracy/Egalitarianism? You're simply wrong. No rational questions allowed. The questions of politics are questions if human nature, and questions of ultimate good and value.

American philosophy is a joke

Universities will die and philosophers will be exiled.

>>13123926
>Tripfagging under Kierkegaard
4chan is dead

>>13123859
If Americans keep pretending logic circlejerk is called philosophy and continue defunding humanities, then yes.

>>13125170
>namefagging as an analytic philosopher under kierkegaard

I hope you die name/pfp-fag.

>>13123945
>there's nothing really new to discover
That's retarded. You're retarded.

>>13123859
What's the answer you want?

>>13124212
So long as we can ask questions about ethics, metaphysics, epistemology, scientific methodology, and logic, we will always require a field that can attempt to answer them. So long as we have no fundamental answers pertaining to existence, we will need a field that can attempt to answer them. We require a field that can ask questions with no starting points, and no presumptions about that which is. Philosophy, while being productive of almost every intellectual pursuit that can now better answer questions about each pursuit, is still required for both truly holistic thinking and thinking without boundaries. Only the uncreative and the ignorant believe that innovation respectively cannot be furthered and has become stagnant. You have provided no evidence to support claims for either. You have only given anecdotal evidence. You believe that the split of political science and other fields from philosophy warrants its dismissal, except in cases where older thought remains relevant, overlooking the still potent INTERDISCIPLINARY nature of philosophical inquiry. Philosophy isn't what it used to be, but it still remains of utmost importance in the very grounding of our beliefs.
By the way, medieval philosophy was incredibly important, especially considering the works of figures like Boethius, Aquinas, Ockham, Scotus, Avicenna, and so on.
You speak of philosophy as if you understand it, but just the same as the rest of us, you understand nothing.