/lit/ - Literature

>>16287581
>What do they have
humanity

>>16287581
correct

>>16287581
Continental has historicism. I think an analytic historicism can be fruitful, particularly which elements have most impact in the world.

>>16287581
analytic ethics help noone, noone consults ethics to make decisions, the only interesting ethical conversations pertain to how ethical norms arise and impact society, something continentals pointed out over a century ago. analytics use reality to understand concepts, continentals use concepts to understand reality

Are you implying that analytic philosophers invented utilitarianism, ethics of care and virtue ethics or is this one of those anachronisms were
>Philosophers of older times I like are analytical
>Philosophers I don't like are continental

>>16287673
They were analytics and the people working with this type of philosophy today are analytics.
>>16287655
Historicism is not useful at all.

Analytic philosophy is to real philosophy as YA literature is to real literature

OP is the philosophy equivalent of a paragraph long defense of reading Harry Potter exclusively

>>16287696
If we get to the foundational aspect of reality, we'd like to know what makes it go forward universally. Granted you'd have to deny the continental becoming and appeal to being but there's application.

Can you please define stuff thank you very much

>>16287673
If we properly redefine analytic vs continental we'd get a universal term which we can use to understand all the philosophers.

>>16287706
It has no basis in reality. I can go look at any number of things in any way I want but that doesn't mean it's true.

>>16287727
would you suppose math needs to be developed a certain degree to get a certain degree of technology?

>>16287581

>>16287742
Yes but that has nothing to do with historicism.

>>16287758
Because it's a statement without humans.
To go further I'd argue you need philosophy developed to a degree to get a certain degree of math. Turning this into a historicism we can say we can detect a culture's technological range by their development in philosophy. We could expand it in implications or in foundation.

>>16287581
>For the average person analytical philosophy has brought them all of meta and normative ethics
Yeah, because average people are always talking about Nussbaum and Rawls. How the deluded can you be?

>>16287778
That's not objective just because you say it. You would have to prove your claim but let's say you could do it how is that philosophy? You're just doing what historians already do.

>>16287822
Historians don't do historicisms unless they're hegelian.
Yeah I would have to prove it but (analytic) historicisms are helpful.

>>16287793
It's applied politics. How doesn't it have an effect?

>>16287581

Continental philosophers actually try to analyze society, lived experience (phenomenology), historical developments, etc.

Analytic philosophy, in contrast, gives nothing that the average person can use. Analytic philosophy is in no way the foundation of any ethical or contemporary political thought whatever. Analytic philosophy cannot claim credit for utilitarianism or virtue ethics, these predate it by a long shot. Care ethics comes from feminism, not analytic language analysis. The idea that any analytic philosopher has contributed 1/10th as much value to political thought as any continental is laughable. Analytic "philosophy of science" can be applied to stuff how exactly? Scientists don't need philosophy of science to get anything done. You've fallen for analytic marketing memes.
Analytics market themselves as "concrete" and "relevant" whereas in reality they produce nothing but endless constroversies over terms that have as many definitions as there are analytic philosophers while LARPing as scientists. You've been had anon.

>>16287832
I'm not saying they do historicism I'm saying they make claims about history using the knowledge they have. I'm saying it's not like you are doing something unique and groundbreaking.

>>16287838
>Continental philosophers actually try to analyze society, historical developments, etc from lived experience (phenomenology)*
ftfy

>Analytic philosophy is simply a bunch of tools that can be used to examine metaphysics of Marxism, feminism, theology etc despite originally being materialist dominated and asserts Being over Becoming (Continental) even if the way they define Being isn't always agreed upon.*
Ftfy2

>>16287838
Notice how you didn't give any examples because you have none lol

>>16287866
who tf cares about me, contie. you made a bad claim.

>>16287882
How?

>>16287885
you claimed historicisms are not useful at all. they would be useful in the stock market

>>16287878

I literally can't think of a single major continental philosopher off the top of my head whose work wouldn't count as an example. Can you?

>>16287890
I'm saying historicism isn't a concept invented by continental philosophers.

>>16287902
It was tho, Hegel inspired Darwin's evolution and Marxism.

>>16287891
Name something originated from continental philosophy that has an effect on the average persons life.

>>16287904
Are you saying historians never made claims about history before Hegel?

>>16287838
Phenomenology is just anecdotes instead of data, useful only for generating awful leftist hogwash. Continentals also often deploy pseudoscience, which they pass off as metaphorical. At least analytics try to deal with science seriously. The philosophy of mind is overwhelmingly analytic with basically no contributions from continentals and the riddle of consciousness THE all important philosophical issue of our time.

>>16287908
Not in a historicism no. Their claims on historical development weren't universal. It was very ad hoc, like historians do now. They just map what happened they don't claim anything is off of a universal concept like Absolute Spirit or material historicism. Dialecticism was used but not formalized in the Hegelian sense, very ad hoc.

>>16287906
it's the other way around, name an analytic concern that originates in an average person's life

>>16287922
Alright so then it's not just general claims but what is useful about a universal concept? It's usually never objective and always disputed so how does it have any effect on the average person? Some ideological historians look through history through some lens in the book he wrote? Why is that useful?

>>16287838
>Continental philosophers actually try to analyze society, lived experience (phenomenology), historical developments, etc.
They aren't "philosophers", they are poets or social critics. Philosophers are concerned with the truth and so are concerned with proof and the demonstration of what is true. Not only do continental types fail to prove what they believe, but they don't even attempt to prove it.

>Analytic "philosophy of science" can be applied to stuff how exactly? Scientists don't need philosophy of science to get anything done. You've fallen for analytic marketing memes.
Brainlet take, science undertaken without a proper philosophical underpinning has produced the current crisis in science today. Most published studies are bullshit because no-one bothers to think about how scientific inference works. A philosophy of science would allow for a theory of scientific inference and would not allow for complete retardation among many "scientists" today who dream on about general artificial intelligence, multiverses, magical dark energy, evolutionary psychology and so on.

>>16287924
Are you really not able to give any examples?

>>16287581
I don't like analytical philosophy because it's composed of the eternal Anglo.

>>16287936
it explains relationships and creation. For instance if you want computer, Turing machine, programming languages, historically and metaphysically you need to develop logic. Those former subjects take axioms from the latter. Understanding the relationship of universals allows you to develop "practical" things as well as opens the door for more knowledge/subjects beyond those applications.

>>16287949
of which

>>16287961
Has this ever been done once using this technique?

>>16287964
A concept coming from continental philosophy which has any effect on the daily life of people. Pick one and we can go over it.

>complete with jungle soundtrack, Land lay behind the stage, flat on the floor (a ‘snake-becoming’ forming the first stage of bodily destratification), croaking enigmatic invocations intercut with sections from Artaud’s asylum poems. In this delirious vocal telegraphy, meaning seemed to disintegrate into sheer phonetic matter, melting into the cut-up beats and acting directly on the subconscious. As Land began to speak in his strange, choked-off voice (perhaps that ‘absurdly high pitched … tone … ancient demonists described as “silvery”’ that he would later report being taunted by),the disconcerted audience began to giggle; the demon voice wavered slightly until Land’s sense of mission overcame his momentary self-consciousness; and as the ‘performance’ continued the audience fell silent, eyeing each other uncertainly as if they had walked into a funeral by mistake. Embarrassment was regarded by Land as just one of the rudimentary inhibitions that had to be broken down in order to explore the unknown—in contrast to the forces of academic domestication, which normalised by fostering a sense of inadequacy and shame before the Masters, before the edifice of what is yet to be learnt—thus reversing the libidinal charge of the ‘unknown’ and turning it into an endless duty, an infinite labour.
Reminder that this is the final form of Continentalism.

>>16287977
i just said that you have the order reversed. continental philosophy studies things that have an effect on the daily life of people, although any philosophy will only help the few people who search it out. our concepts come from experience and are used to further understand it.

>>16288011
>continental philosophy studies things that have an effect on the daily life of people
So like then why argue against it being nothing but philosophical circlejerking?

>>16287581
None of what you mentioned had real effect on people though.
>inb4 Rawls was a advisor in ethics for the US government
Look at what ethical principles actually guide the US government and you'll understand how much of a clown that makes of Rawls.

Also
>rule utilitarianism, ethics of care, virtue ethics
all of that is pre-analytic or heavily derived from preanalytic thought.
Gonna sage you because that was a pretty weak troll all things considered.

>>16288037
Metaethics, normative ethics, and politics has no effect on the average person? Ethics literally guides our entire lives. All policy which has the most effect on our lives comes from analytic philosophy and politics.

>all of that is pre-analytic or heavily derived from preanalytic thought.
People who didn't fit into any camps because of how early it was but wrote clearly with logical arguments and then in our modern times the only people who deal with their work are analytics who also write clearly with logical arguments. Are you trying to say these people align more with the continental way of doing philosophy lol

>>16287969
Wtf are you talking about, we have computers

>>16288106
I'm talking using this technique of philosophy

>>16288117
It's not a technique of philosophy, it's reality. You asked for how universals fit into reality and I explained how

>>16288153
It's not reality just because you say it is

>>16288166
Holy shit you are dumb. I made a point about how universals work. You either contradict or stfu. For an "analytic" fan you sure are pretty dogmatic and dumb.

>>16288169
Anything opposing it is a contradiction which makes it meaningless.

>>16288173
A contradiction is having all truth assignments on variables become false in the formula they're in.
If you can't contradict it then it's at least more true than anything you can bring up. You're needlessly antagonistic.

>>16288186
Are you forgetting Russell's teapot?

>>16288079
>Metaethics, normative ethics
Mostly no effect on the average person
> politics
Politic isn't limited to philosophical theories of politics. If anything the really important political philosophy were crafted well before the birth of analytic philosophy. Analytic philosophy doesn't influence real-world politics, it only rationalizes it after the fact (not to mention it's politically very conformist).

>People who didn't fit into any camps
Who is that? Most philosopher in the past did belong to a school (sometimes even a sect) or at least a larger movement. Most of them had pretty recognizable stances on divisive issue.

>but wrote clearly with logical arguments
That's half of premodern philosophers, and analytic tends to borrow less from those than continental philosophers do.

> in our modern times the only people who deal with their work are analytics
Analytics are culturally averse to dealing with pre-enlightenment philosophers, it's only in the past few decades that they've started to change this. Continental philosophy has always drawn from philosophers of the past. You'd be at pains to find an analytic philosopher before 1980 that was as well-versed in a pre-1900 philosopher as Deleuze was on Spinoza and Duns Scotus, or Nietzsche on the ancients Greeks, etc.
Btw both utilitarianism and virtue ethics were defined and named well before the advent of analytic philosophy. Ethics of care is just a secularization of Christian ethics minus the hard parts.

>who also write clearly with logical arguments
Meh, a lot of it is false clarity induced by hiding they assumptions under a veneer of pseudoscientific rigor. The problem with continentals is figuring out what they say because they like their rhetoric. The problem with analytics is figuring out what they didn't say because they were too superficial to realize what their own arguments rely on.

>Are you trying to say these people
Which people? You keep being awfully unspecific, and I'm starting to think you haven't read any continental or analytic philosophy and that your grasp of the history of Western philosophy is more than tenuous.

Continental philosophy has contributed to the social sciences, whether you think it made it better is something else entirely.

>>16288195
Are you a Hitchen's fan as well?
You asked a question and I explained it. If you want to debate then we can do that drop your discord, but assuming it's a normal conversation that holds. We agree on axioms then we check to see if it matches. You haven't defined axioms but decided to be antagonistic, I assume you treat it as a debate. That's not how you debate.

>>16288217
You are suggesting that a way of viewing history is objective as if simply saying I view it another way using your own evidence isn't valid. We can't falsify it. Either person could be right or wrong and we have no way of proving it.That's not even the debate. The debate is does this have any effect on the average person lol. It has no effect. Historians viewing history through whatever lens is nothing but philosophical circlejerking.

>>16288237
Falsification means it's not objective or tautological. The point of a debate is to agree on fundamental axioms then work towards a conclusion. You were being antagonistic and i was asking in regards to what. You can't deny something with nothing, it's impossible to do so.
Yes Marxism had an effect on people you god damned zoomer and that's been explained multiple times you just don't want to listen.
What does philosophical circle-jerking mean? It's not real? Do you deny history happens or do you just deny causes?

>>16288237
>>16288217
btw whats your discord even put the first two letters of our name if you don't wanna post i might know who you are already lol

>>16288264
stfu zoomer and I'm only second
sjruruchunchun#8315

>>16288260
>Marxism
Explain to me how historical materialism has had any effect on the average person.

>What does philosophical circle-jerking mean? It's not real?
No value to the average person nothing of use beyond discord rambling

>>16288271
9315*

>>16288273
I mean it kinda started ww2 and the cold war and started worker's rights and influenced economic and social policy for the past 100 odd years.

Define value then. It's of some value necessarily

>>16287581
Analytic "philosophy" is just watered down science and logic for dwarfs.

>>16288284
Historical materialism did that? I don't think that was in the mind of the revolting uneducated peasants killing people.

>>16288293
I think you need to reword your contention. The takeover of Russia was done by the "Marxist inteligentsia", so it was definitely on their mind. I think you aren't valuing ppl enough because ppl don't revolt for anything and everything. I don't know one revolt that isn't intellectualized. Even current marxism assumes a historicism of privilege and that's all you hear on social media and in schools.

>>16288293
Either way that contradicts your Analytic philosophy point. More ppl know historical materialism than even the name Analytic philosophy.

>>16288312
You are Marxism as a whole as evidence for the value of a certain part of it. I'm sure his his analysis of the petit bourgeoisie in Bataysk was in the mind of the 7 intelligentsia who read it but you wouldn't say it's of extreme value on the average person.

>>16288325
Then you're dumb. All of china learns historical materialism. It's kinda the key part to being Marxist. You learn stupid liberal crap in your school. Just because it's a big word for you doesn't mean other ppl don't have to study it. Ppl don't revolt for no reason especially against America in Vietnam after revolting from South vietnam. In Russia culture changed so much to include women in the military, soviets. Maybe you're projecting, are you a robot who doesn't notice crap around you and wonder wth is happening? That's not realistic and even if nobody knew it, it still affected their lives because of it and it effects us still today. Social security is a liberal implementation of historical materialism.

>>16288342
Yes I concede historical materialism has a big effect on the guy who bags grocery or puts up dry wall. If historical materalism never existed they wouldn't be where they are today.

>>16288342
>Social security is a liberal implementation of historical materialism.
Didn't even notice this lol. This has to be bait. Walk me through this with sources please

>>16288353
It did, without it you don't have worker's rights determined by materialism vs a caste or God or something etc.

>>16288359
Social security is giving material benefits to workers based on historical materialist reasons as described above in giving rights.

>>16288380
>It did, without it you don't have worker's rights determined by materialism vs a caste or God or something etc.
Do you have any evidence to suggest that in labor history of the US historical materialism was something in the forefront or are you just guessing?

>Social security is giving material benefits to workers based on historical materialist reasons as described above in giving rights.
If historical materialism never existed FDR would never of enacted social security? You are the dumbest person I've ever met on this board.

>>16288380
Can someone use this same reasoning to say that Evolaian mysticism is of great importance to the average person. I know it could be done.

>>16288396
Holy shit just read a book or something. Seattle had a huge worker's protest at the start of the 20th century that scared the shit out of everyone before it happened. Eugene Debbs was a huge socialist candidate third party at start of 20th. This all influenced America. I don't know where else worker's rights in unions, social security, job guarantees etc would come from besides marxism.
I'm curious to know where else it could come from ideologically. You can't just pull worker's rights and historical materialism out of your ass and you need those to come to those insights. Christianity is close but it's charity not worker's benefits.

>>16288412
No, it's had extremely low influence.

>>16288449
>Holy shit just read a book or something. Seattle had a huge worker's protest at the start of the 20th century that scared the shit out of everyone before it happened. Eugene Debbs was a huge socialist candidate third party at start of 20th. This all influenced America. I don't know where else worker's rights in unions, social security, job guarantees etc would come from besides marxism.
>I'm curious to know where else it could come from ideologically. You can't just pull worker's rights and historical materialism out of your ass and you need those to come to those insights. Christianity is close but it's charity not worker's benefits.
Do you think if he had the rest of Marxism just without historical materialism he would never did what he did?
>No, it's had extremely low influence.
Prove it

>>16288467
You can't have marxism without material historicism. It doesn't make sense without it. You can't have a road map to communism, you can't justify the worker.

Go ask 1000 ppl on the street if they've heard of Julius evola and I can guarantee you it's low. People know marxism. It's had an effect.

>>16288485
Yes I concede sorry. Historical materialism has a huge effect on our society and literally everyone is influenced it. I forgot the whole country was Marxist.

>>16288499
Nobody said that, keep playing poor-pitiful-you.

>>16288502
All the policy makers in Washington all make sure their votes go through the historical materalist lens before they vote. I forgot that part in Civics class

>>16287711
LOL. Read more, nerd.

>>16288509
It affected people you moron. That's what you brought up multiple times.

>>16288532
That's not what I said. I said effected the average person in a way that was important or useful. Would you say that since the Situationists in France played an important role in May 68 in France that “Détournement” an important part of the Situationists platform would be considered something that has an important and or useful effect on the life of the average person French person in 2020? Yes or no please

>>16288557
I think we should stick to a subject and analyze it. Throwing in more examples throws the conversation off course.
I think you have a certain level that it must be known and cared about to define it as known or cared about.
Social security affects almost everyone in the whole world and unions certainly have. Those are directly derivative of marxism and marxism is founded upon material historicism.

>>16288578
I'm done. You are delusional. Maybe someone else can jump in. I concede FDR was a historical materalist.

>>16288583
Nobody will because your post sucks ass and your arguments were terrible and I consider myself in line w analytic philosophy. You made terrible arguments and shown you will devolve into derivative arguments about obvious things and you're uncharitable. You can call a /pol/tard if you want someone to try and pick up your pieces but you went down terrible avenues to prove your point that they'd have difficulty with it.

>>16288578
Is your argument basically if this historically important person never read this book we wouldn't be here today hence this book from 1280 that helped invent the printing press or whatever is useful and important of to the average person because otherwise we wouldn't have the printing press? This is basically your argument right? You aren't saying that the book is actually useful or important intrinsically to the average person in this current time but that without it the world would not be the same like if the Caveman never figured out what fire was.

>>16288622
Historically it affected people. People don't read now and tradmarx was supplanted by liberalism and the frankfurt school but it has had strong affect and that's just in marxism. Evolution has been argued to be derivative of hegel's dialecticism and historicism.

>>16288644
So you would say since Hegel influenced Marx. Hegel is useful and of importance to the average person because without Hegel we wouldn’t have social security because we wouldn’t have Marx. Yes or no?

>>16288660
I think that's fair to say but it depends on how you define it. I'd say since social security is part of the set of historical materialism and people care about social security yes. For an inverse to hate marxism but like social security is contradictive. You'd have to redefine social security in theological terms, different economics or classes etc and reimplement with those new axioms to like this new social security and dislike marxism.

>>16288681
So you would then say that every possible event is important and useful to the average person since it’s what get us to where we are today. Without the Big bang there would be no Hegel and without Hegel’s mother there would be no Hegel. So we obviously have different meanings of what “important and useful to the average person” is. You just played dumbed to get me to post 20 times but if you just stopped acting like a child and went with what I’m obviously trying to get at in the first post you would of said “no historical materialism is not of importance in the way you are suggesting” just like caveman figuring out that you can bang two sticks together is not of the utmost importance to us in the way I'm suggesting.

>>16288681
Just to add to be more clear even though the caveman figuring out you can bang two sticks togethers is important and without them we or Hegel would not be here it's not of importance in the way I was suggesting in the original post and I think you would agree.

>>16287914
>Phenomenology is just anecdotes

North American women calling "authethnographies" """phenomenology""" is not phenomenology. Read Husserl. Read Heidegger.

>>16287977

I'm going to take this as an admission of defeat that you don't even know enough about continental philosophy to name one continental philosopher who fits the criticism that you're trying to level against the entire genre. Go read more books you fucking dumbass.

>>16288699
>I'm going to take this as an admission of defeat that you don't even know enough about continental philosophy to name one continental philosopher who fits the criticism that you're trying to level against the entire genre. Go read more books you fucking dumbass.
So you have nothing either huh :)

>>16288689
>>16288697
You asked if continentalism had any effect on the average person, it does.
Things degrade in value in creation. Metaphysically math is of less value than logic as it's incapable of doing everything logic is capable of. As time goes on social security will be replaced by something less worker derivative and politics will hopefully move past the ripples marxism created. This is not true for analytic philosophy which has had great impact in math, logic, linguistics etc but there have been no revolution etc for analytic philosophy.

>>16288727
You didn't answer any of the questions in my post.

>>16288732
I did you dumbass you just don't read analytic philosophy

>>16288740
ok thanks for admitting it's bait.

>>16288742
Yes your op is bait. Read Frege or stfu.

>>16287581
Roger Scrotum

>>16287581

Bump because true

>>16288711

The entire point of my post is that you don't even know a SINGLE concept from continental philosophy to point to as an example here. I could talk about being towards death, Deleuzian "rhizomes," the Other, or any other number of ideas and explain how they are applicable to real life. But there is no point explaining any of this shit because you are a 14 year old pseud (you have to be 18 to post here btw) who has never even picked up a single work of continental philosophy in their entire life.

And if you're about to explain to me how the individuating process of confronting your own mortality or discovering who you are has no relevance to daily life that's not proof that continental philosophy has no relevance to everyday life--it's just proof that you're an intellectual slug (which, as far as I can tell, isn't far from par for course for analytics).

>>16287716
You can do that with anything though

>>16287620
>Humanity