[ 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: 283 KB, 1024x768, 0_GAv7bWFUeBNyvBRu.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16609707 No.16609707 [Reply] [Original]

>crack Being and Time open
>start reading
>read the text along with commentary
>read secondary sources
>read some of his later essays on identity, technology, knowledge
>realize i'm getting fluent in heideggerian
>suddenly come to see what a massive waste of time philosophy really is, just a massive circlejerk of failed novelists and poets scamming people out of their money and time

Yeah, I guess after all this time I'm finally done with philosophy for good.

>> No.16609719

>>16609707
It was never meant for you, anyway.

>> No.16609743

>>16609707
Nice philosophy, kiddo.

>> No.16609751

Philosophy is the mere accrual of words for later use. Except this later moment never comes and you've wasted cognitive power shitting up your life. I hope you're not over 30, OP.

>> No.16609802

based, happy for you kid. you’re going to make it.

>> No.16609821

is there anything in life that's not a meme?

>> No.16609836

>>16609821
starting a strong and comfy family with a prime and capable wife

>> No.16609960

>>16609836
Sounds boring desu, I'd rather cut my dick off and contribute to the downfall of western civilisation.

>> No.16609965
File: 13 KB, 200x318, Violence_and_the_Sacred_(French_edition).gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16609965

>>16609707
Based, anon. Philosophy (metaphysics) is for retards. Take the fundamental anthropology pill instead.

>> No.16609986

>>16609965
But Girard never went to the field, never did any actual research. I'm currently reading Jack Goody, Levi-Strauss and Malinowski.

>> No.16610010

>>16609707
Remember. You’re here forever.

>> No.16610016

...its the friends you make along the way.

>> No.16610043

>>16609986
I think what you're trying to say here is that Girard didn't ground his fundamental anthropology in some form of empiricism, because he most definitely "did research". And yes, you'd be right—hypothesizing the historical, *événementiel* origin of the human is necessarily a non-empirical endeavor.
>Jack Goody, Levi-Strauss and Malinowski
All metaphysicians in disguise. Yuck.

>> No.16610049

>>16610043
How the FUCK is Goody a metaphysician in disguise? Levi-Straus, yes, all that talk about savage mentality and whatnot reeks of metaphysics. But Goody? I don't see how.

>> No.16610173

Read Wittgenstein, OP. Make his Philosophical Investigations the last thing you read.

>> No.16610181

>>16609707
>suddenly come to see what a massive waste of time philosophy really is
Can you explain how and why you came to this realisation?

>> No.16610227

>>16609707
well modern philosophy starts with Kant prefacing the critique by saying he is failed writer and thus embarks on his philosophical opus, this can be seen in all greats of the tradition harking back to greeks

>> No.16610229

>>16609719
you could have just read philosophers such as Nietzsche who directly explain why philosophy is a waste of time but you just figured it out yourself, all the same

>> No.16610391

>>16609960
>I'd rather cut my dick off and contribute to the downfall of western civilisation.
Same thing, tranny.

>> No.16610439

>>16609960
dilate

>> No.16610462

>>16610181
I just pondered on what I was doing, like, physically. My reading of Heidegger was doing nothing but allowing me to read Heidegger better. All of these secondary sources and commentaries were also written by people whose main occupation or ability is to read Heidegger well and speak his language. It's like a gear spinning without any accompanying mechanism. Pure spin, for itself, by itself. From Heidegger I traced back my steps, thinking about what had led me down this path, the readings I'd done, what I'd studied in college, what I was giving up by studying this stuff. It was like being hit in the face by a gust of rain out of nowhere. I don't think all of it was entirely purposeless or useless. It was also fun. I don't know how to explain it well, I'm sure other people have felt the same about any of their interests/hobbies.

>> No.16610490

>>16610462
Which Heidegger's works should I read first? Interested in his interpretation of Parmenides' ontology and his criticism of Metaphysics.

>> No.16610503

>>16610490
There's not much point to read his essays or lectures if you haven't tackled Being and Time. If you're not feeling particularly adventurous (and don't want to commit this much energy to a single book), try to look at secondary sources about it, even those "very short introductions" will do. Then read The Question Concerning Technology.

>> No.16610520
File: 13 KB, 300x298, 2013.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16610520

>>16609707
If I only studied hard sciences all my life and realized this without ever opening a philosophy book am I smart or stupid?

>> No.16610523

>>16610503
Could you summarize the telos of Heidegger's thought in your words?

>> No.16610528

>>16610520
It can go either way, maybe you just didn't have a mind for it, and that ended up saving you from falling into this hole. Either way, you dodged a bullet there, friend.

>> No.16610536

>>16610462
How did you decide what is purposeful?

>> No.16610537

>>16610520
The promise of philosophy is insight into the world of experiences, science tells us nothing about that so I say it’s neutral. You can still do philosophy without reading about it, that’s probably the best kind to do actually. To try to figure out life for yourself.. or maybe it’s a useless pursuit

>> No.16610562

>>16610520
You just committed to certain philosophical positions without ever trying out others. As a result, your vision is limited to whatever your conditioning and biological predispositions gave you. It's not that you're smart or stupid, it's that you're mechanical.

>> No.16610565

>>16610462
That's interesting. It seems that you got tired of reading Heidegger more than Heidegger convinced you that philosophy is useless. I haven't read much of Heidegger myself but for some reason people on this board seem to think that he and Wittgenstein and others showed how metaphysics is just language games or whatever. I struggle to see how this is the case though.

>> No.16610576

>>16609707
>suddenly come to see what a massive waste of time philosophy really is, just a massive circlejerk of failed novelists and poets scamming people out of their money and time
Heideggerian are for sure. Plato is an accomplished novelist and poet, as is Nietzsche.
Aristotle, Epicurus, Chrysippus, Kant, Leibniz and Spinoza are proto-scientists.
Plotinus and all the mystics are not philosophers but they are most likely right on everything.
German Idealists as well as most continentals are failed novelists and poets, almost all french philosophers also are.
Analytic philosophers are failed novelist and poets and philosophers.
Wittgenstein is of course not an analytic philosopher. He is a mystic.
Guenon, Evola and friends are failed novelist and poets and philosophers and historians of religions and human beings.

>> No.16610580

>>16610562
Lol butthurt

>> No.16610644
File: 23 KB, 437x431, 47d.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16610644

>>16610523
Heidegger was trying to get philosophy back to basics, and for him that meant the study of Being. He was mainly trying to show that philosophy (all the way from Plato/Aristotle) had gone off track by focusing on consciousness, epistemology and the subject/object distinction. Aristotle had fucked up big time when he brought up the notion of substance, something like the metaphysical substract of the universe. Heidegger said the only worthwhile subject worth of study, because it's the most basic, is Being, because it's pressupposed in everything.

What is Being? A cheeky answer: the opposite of Nothing, of no-thing. You'll receive a million definitions depending to whom you ask. What is important about Being is that you (an example of Dasein, a being-in-the world) cannot escape Being, you cannot try to see yourself as a subject and other beings as subjects, both Dasein and other beings are into Being. You're thrown in the world and you relate to the world immersed in Being.

He argued that philosophers had failed to recognize this, and tried to show how scientific endeavours or propositional knowledge are only one way in which Being manifests itself, but this type of knowledge is only concerned with the ontic (as opposed to the ontological). It also alienates you from Being, because you start treating other beings as inferior, you try to categorize and see them as objects. By way of scientific inquiry you, Dasein, become unable to act as a Being-towards-death (a notion completely lifted up from Kierkegaard, for which he gives no fucking source in the text, and yes, I MAD, because Fear and Trembling is a great 'lil book).

I'm now getting completely fucking off track, because I see that I'll need to introduce his conception of World, of everydayness, of "ready at hand" and merely "present at hand", how Time is a fundamental property of Dasein, that we're all immersed in Meaning (Bedeutung). I'd have to tell you about how your relation to non-Dasein beings is on par with your relation to other Dasein. It's a complete fucking shitshow of new words and this immense edifice of words, words, and words.

I'm getting mad just thinking about it. I'm sorry, Anon, but I can't even type this shit without feeling bad for myself. Some of the stuff is good to read, like when he talks about our relationship to tools and everydayness, but most of it has been said more beautifully, more compellingly, less abtrusely by poets and novelists. At heart, Heidegger has a fucking agenda and he wastes your time with it. Making the effort to read Heidegger is the biggest mistake a Dasein can make during the course of his finite being-in-the-world.

>> No.16610658

>>16610576
Analytic philosophers are failed mathematicians and scientists, whose contributions are only better than those of computer scientists or physicists because no one will make a social media app or atomic bomb from their autistic screeching.

>> No.16610756

>>16610644
Lmao so you gave up at Heidegger’s existential analysis and never even glanced at his works after the Kehre? You were basically under way into poetic dwelling

>> No.16610762

>>16609960
Based

>> No.16610776

>>16610644
A good answer, anon. Thank you for putting your time into it.

>> No.16610801

>>16610756
His later stuff is even more disgusting, because by that time the old oaf was so full of himself that he just started spouting completely megalomaniac shit like he had been chosen by Being to speak. What a fucking, fucking dumb piece of shit Heidegger was. Please don't think I'm dunking on """continental philosophy""", analytic philosophy is even more inconsequential, because these anglo autists can't communicate with anybody but themselves.

>> No.16610984

>>16609960
Based

>> No.16610999

>who cares what dead people thought xD
People like OP are doomed to repeat history's errors

>> No.16611003

>>16610999
As are we all
(Checked.)

>> No.16611028

>>16610999
Wasted trips. It's one thing to be embedded in a tradition that values ancestrality, it's quite another to partake in the cuckoldry called written language passed on in books.

>> No.16611041

>>16609707
Heidegger is probably the most obvious fraud of them all. Utter fool

>> No.16611052

>>16611028
Sometimes those books expose the tradition for being fucking retarded, though.

>> No.16611056

>>16609707
Read philosophy anyway for the following reasons:
1. You will develop a sharp sense of what is bullshit and what is not
2. You will have counter points to obscure garbage that philosophy cucks spout
3. You will learn how to write your own drivel and have a bunch of retards drool over it.

>> No.16611120

>>16609707
>philosophy: the art of thinking clearly
How can this be a waste of time?

>> No.16611147

>>16611120
Have you ever seen how philosophers write, though? Even analytic """philosophers""" are constantly making a fuss, conflating concepts, hiding behind mathematical logic.

>> No.16611192

>>16609707
Philosophy is an intellectual ponzi scheme.

>> No.16611199

>>16611192
Exactly, it's like those MFA programs in the US.

>> No.16611206

>>16611056
Wrong on all three counts. What is philosophical bullshit has little correlation to what is bullshit in the real world. You could have spent time you wasted on philosophy on relationships, networking, financial wisdom, skills, gym etc. all of which would have a tangible net improvement on your life quality.

2. pointless and a waste of time

3. not unless it appeals to the SJW literary/intellectual filter and even then a minimal chance

>> No.16611221

Feels > Reals tbqh

>> No.16611222

>>16611206
>relationships, networking, financial wisdom, skills, gym etc.
Pointless and a waste of time.

>> No.16611229

>>16611222
if you want to die alone, broke and feeble then yes.

>> No.16611257

>>16611206
Being able to detect bullshit in deliberately obscure text is useless apparently

>> No.16611293

>>16611257
lmao when in your life are you going to use the skill to detect bullshit in deliberately obscure text? wait, scratch that, when are you going to be reading a "deliberately obscure" text? unless that is your fucking hobby lmao.

>> No.16611333

>>16611293
You mentioned "financial knowledge". Legal documents go along with it. But yes otherwise it's very rare you will read anything like that

>> No.16611411

>>16611333
reading legal documents or simply doing business you will pick up much more by osmosis as far as what you should detect than what philosophy would ever give you. a philosophy PhD will be completely outwitted by mediocre IQ people dealing with financials/business as their job. completely pointless.

>> No.16611434

>>16611229
Not that anon. I wouldn't go so far as saying those things are pointless and a waste of time. Eating isn't pointless and a waste of time, so those things aren't either. The thing is, eating isn't enough. At least, nor for everyone. Anyone who thinks humans can do something beyond fulfilling basic drives stands a chance of becoming interested in philosophy.

>> No.16611448

>>16611434
of course they do and then they realize philosophy is a ponzi scam intellectual dead end.

>> No.16611474

>>16611448
How is it a ponzi scam?

>> No.16611537

>>16611474
A philosophy professor's sole occupation is that of teaching undergraduate and graduate students. The only purpose of someone studying philosophy in the undergraduate level is either to get humanities credit or to go on to law school. If you're a professor in graduate school, you're necessarily teaching more than one student. All graduate students in philosophy dream of one day teaching philosophy. A philosophy degree helps you with no other occupation, and even if you get some other job, you'd been making more money had you pursued an education for that job or just worked. Philosophy depends on this stream of wanna be professors, and one day there will be a drought when people realize it is a Ponzi scheme.

>> No.16611552

Just do what I do, consume philosophy like it’s art but the most complete art possible. What could be more spiritual and ultimate are than a person combining the elements of reality into a singular vision and conception? That alone is to me the supreme aesthetic experience.

>> No.16611558

>>16611474
the originator yields the most benefits (academic recognition, finances) while increasingly diminshing returns are available to late-comers who modulate the initial scam until at some point everybody realizes it's all a self-referrential scam that has exhausted itself and a new ponzi gets set up. rinse and repeat.

>> No.16611566

>>16611537
lmao you could say this about any discipline in academia

>> No.16611574

>>16611537
also for most people who get a doctorate in philosophy the main goal is not to teach philosophy to undergraduate and graduate students its to publish research and books

>> No.16611577

>>16611574
>its to publish research and books

that only get used inside academia as teaching subjects.

>> No.16611585

>>16610520
You should only study what you can practically use, beyond that, it is pointless to argue about smart/stupid.
The only question should be: "Does it work?"

>> No.16611601 [DELETED] 

>>16611574
The only way to publish research and books is by being affiliated to an university. If you're affiliated to an university, you're most likely teaching. Do you think every uni is like Princenton where they pay some oafs to just sit in a room and publish? The only reason these people teachers or non-teachers get paid is because there's a stream of students. There's literally no way philosophy isn't a ponzi scheme.

>> No.16611644

>>16611601
how is this any different from other fields in the hard and soft sciences, should physics and mathematics also be abandoned because most of their current influence remains in academia?

>> No.16611648

>>16611537
congratulations, you have discovered a major issue with the entire institution of education

>> No.16611658

>>16611644
Physics and mathematics are basically a lottery. These people are paid to do research and they're given some freedom. Every once in a while, though, one of the ideas generated in such fields is picked up and put to use. There is absolutely no reason why philosophy should be taught in universities. Sorry for deleting that post, It was full of grammar/spelling mistakes, I apologize.

>>16611552
This makes sense, and that's why I like reading French people like Baudrillard. He writes bullshit, but he writes it in such vague, aesthetic terms that it feels like I'm reading poetry. His book "America" is just like that.

>> No.16611667

>>16611648
this is only an issue if you see philosophy and education in general as a means to an end (talking about higher education), and as an activity and discipline that is enjoyable and has worth in and of itself (after all this is the literal definition of philosophy). When you see knowledge as simply a commodity that can be sold to an employer of course one might start to think of higher education as simply a financial scam.

>> No.16611679

>>16611667
*and NOT as an activity and discipline that is enjoyable and has worth in and of itself

>> No.16611686

>>16611667
No one should be getting in debt so early in life just to "pursue knowledge". I agree that reading about art history, literature, musicology, etc is deeply rewarding. I love all of these things. But the fact remains that young people are being taken advantage of by enrolling in such majors.

>> No.16611828

>>16609707
Heidegger unironically gave me a greater appreciation for life, Being and completely changed the way I see things particularly with his notions of readiness-to-hand and worldhood. Also helped me come to terms with the fact that there is no ultimate ontological or epistemic foundation for anything, Being cannot be the ground of itself but this in no way precludes a meaningful or authentic existence.

>> No.16612070

>>16609707
Heidegger literally helped me with redefining some legal concepts by applying his use of everydayness to the concept. People often don't realize that law at an advanced level becomes pure philosophy full of ontological questions, to a certain degree law is paid philosophizing

>> No.16612080

>>16612070
>trying to save a megacorp a couple of millions on taxes
>hmmm...yes...applied philosophy

>> No.16612098

>>16612080
Yes my man indeed. Tax law in particular is filled with never ending debates on whether certain definitions are applicable on legal acts. Even the question whether something is an 'entrepreneur' or not for such a thing as European VAT is an example of that

>> No.16613780

>>16612098
>tax law
Jesus, gtfo of here.

>> No.16614149
File: 876 KB, 1267x3795, Chan Culture.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16614149

>>16610644
>I'm now getting completely fucking off track, because I see that I'll need to introduce his conception of World, of everydayness, of "ready at hand" and merely "present at hand", how Time is a fundamental property of Dasein, that we're all immersed in Meaning (Bedeutung). I'd have to tell you about how your relation to non-Dasein beings is on par with your relation to other Dasein. It's a complete fucking shitshow of new words and this immense edifice of words, words, and words.
People should just come here and Lurk.
>pic related

>> No.16614153

>>16614149
I didn't get it. What are you trying to say?

>> No.16614190
File: 38 KB, 640x640, 1593834246370.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16614190

>>16614153
That the experience of Chan Culture is a better explanation of Hiedegger than Heidegger's books.

>> No.16614243

>>16609707
>crack Being and Time open
this was your mistake, you delved right into pseudo-lit proto-PoMo garbage that is Heidegger

he is philosophically barren

>> No.16614247
File: 49 KB, 1503x223, mnemosyne nazu.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16614247

>>16614153
>>16614149

>> No.16614703
File: 116 KB, 699x749, 1588955432440.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16614703

>>16611206

>> No.16614748

You say "finally" but only mention highnigger. Who else have you read?

>> No.16614820

>>16609707

I stopped reading philosophy for a few years because I felt I got nothing out of it and got back into it again. I read more analytic stuff now though.

I did read a lot of Heidegger too and had similar feelings. I read the Stambaugh translation of being and time and loads of his essays and lectures.

I felt I became better at reading Heidegger and not much else. I felt that what he was doing was just a hyper reductive analysis of philosophical systems and concepts by saying look at how we've neglected being in this concept or system of philosophy.

Then there's the historicism, etymological extravagance, hermeneutic indulgence, national myopia, excessive Hellenism, circular reasoning and on it goes.