/lit/ - Literature

>>13330187
Whoo. No.
In philosophy, think like, that all the actions only seeking to find clear and distinct concepts are all imprudent and immature.

Philosophical investigation should be the first choice to get out of this thinking. I want to recommend Process and reality, but it is quite hard.

>>13330187
Lots of philosophers talk about philosophy of language.
Lycan - philosophy of language

Plato talks about it so does Aristotle, kant hegel
Etc but yeah analytic philosophy is good and if u feel like having a rumspringa get into derrida

>>13330230
That's kind of hard to understand. I would like to read Philosophical Investigations sometime, but I still have a lot of pre-reading to get done first. Currently I'm on Descartes, and I made this thread in part because "Cogito ergo sum" seems like such a flawed attempt at proving one's existence, and part of the issue is over-reliance on language. I can't claim to have a very good analysis of Descartes, but that sort of thing lessens my enthusiasm for his ideas a lot, you know? That's part of why.
>>13330238
Thanks!

>>13330245
This site btw https://fuckyeahlogical.tumblr.com/post/128964910533/analytic-philosophy-reading-list-for-the-self

>>13330245
Don't go too far on that guy! Maybe secondary source on Spinoza is great to... just start to modern philosophy.
Kinda strange general characterization of the Modern european philosophical tradition is that it consists of a series of critiques to Descartes' cogito ergo sum and his solipsism.
You literally can do that! It's kinda funny.

>>13330187
No book can ever solve this problem. How can words prove that words can drive us to truth?

>>13330187
Whats that image from

>>13330245
Could you elaborate? I fail to see how the cogito is anything but self evidently true.

>>13330187
Are you aware that you're doing the same thing right now? This is vacuous, just read (secondary literature on) Lacan or something.

>>13330277
It's from 素晴らしき日々
>>13330289
I suppose part of it is certainly true, in that something is doubting, which means that something exists. However, is that which exists really me? What if it's like the Hindus say and there really is no me? How do I draw a line here?

Ultimately, my frustration with it is that while I suppose it's true from our natural, human perspective, it's like there might be a deeper reality under this that makes us question what it is to really 'exist' as we know it. What does it mean to exist? Do the things outside me not exist? It's the context that bothers me - without any more information to go on, I have no idea what my existence could actually be, where it begins and ends, and anything else that would really matter. I know Descartes uses this as a starting point to prove the existence of God, but if I remember well, this is considered a poor proof by nearly everyone, and so the mere fact that I exist in some capacity, possibly like in a vacuum, is hard to make anything of. Does this make sense? I can try to explain again.
>>13330300
I don't think it's vacuous. It sounds paradoxical, but I'm not saying language is useless or that it can't explain some concepts.

>>13330187
Robert Anton Wilson spoke about this quite a bit. Might be worth looking into if you're interested.

>>13330314
Sorry i dont speak atomic bomb

>>13330314
If you're in a solipsism rn how I work around it is just say it doesn't matter if only we exist, the physics that your universe follows is necessarily objective and the "person " you're talking to necessarily has to have followed the same physics.
Also because the universe's laws of logic precede man's, and ethics necessarily follows the adherence of the way you believe the world works, again necessarily your understanding of the universe must adhere to the universe or it has consequences of being wrong, then ethics is objective

>>13330187
https://www.bu.edu/wcp/Papers/Lang/LangOrba.htm

>>13330277
>>13330351
Subarashiki Hibi. The English title is Wonderful Everyday.

>>13330187
Nominalism. Postulated by the heretic Occam

My brain is growing more big