/lit/ - Literature

>anon "thread"

>>17351382
Mutt hands typed this post

>>17351382
OP = either ""redpillled"" definitely alpha male against cultural marxism or analytical philosophy cuck
desu i dont know what is worse

>>17351459
One is just the well-read version of the other

>>17351382
To wholesale dismiss an entire group of philosophers because you dont like a few or think they're not comparable to their peers in a certain timeframe is a smoothbrain move. Even if you don't like some of the big names, surely you couldn't find someone like De Maistre or Montaigne appealing.

He is not wrong though.

>>17351479
Descartes is kind of based. Camus and Voltaire... not so much.

>>17351382
>"french" philosophy

>>17351459
Continental Philosophy is a priori trash.

>>17351471
>t. Person who has got their opinion on analytic philosophy from Twitter feeds
Analytic philosophers are very famously barely political if not anti. At most they're generally liberal conservatives even if the newer additions to analytics (analytic feminism/marxism/etc) seem to buck this they actually follow the trend.

>>17351515
here we go again
good luck figuring out logical induction and mind-independent empiricism!
come back when you got it

>>17351527
It's done so. Induction is an into relationship between sets.

>>17351538
can you give a source? I have seen this done only in math by this definition

>>17351526
Really too long, sorry but didn't read

>>17351547
Enderton does a good book on set theory.

>>17351554
Gtfo my board then you're the only dumbass here tonight.

>>17351490
I disagree. Camus is obviously not the most profound philosopher but I think he's good at what he's aiming, I see him as kind of a first step into philosophy lived in relation to the world. He's not building a very complex system, and he doesn't pretend to. He's trying to tell you that things can be alright and can work out, and I think he succeeds in doing it. He's not the end game, he isn't supposed to be, but his philosophy makes sense and is helpful without being a cope (i.e. pretending things are not the way they are). That's why I like him.
Voltaire now, I would barely call him a philosopher, he's more a polemist and a "thinker". True his system of thoughts is not great, but as a polemist, he is excellent and it's no wonder he was so well-known during his life. As such I would call him "based" even if I don't agree with the man, because it's always enjoyable to read someone shitting on everything he can lays his hands on (in a funny manner).

>>17351382
>Montaigne, Baudrillard, Maistre, Girard

>>17351573
based list but it's a bit weird reading the name of de Maistre between Baudrillard and Girard

>>mass reply

The only worthwhile French philosophers are Montaigne, Caraco and Guenon. The rest is a long series of attempts to write something meaningful through the use of reason, but resulted in vapid lumps of batshit.

No one truly smart can think that the Enlightenment dudes, Descartes (more like discarded), Foucault, Deleuze, Derrida, Baudrillard, Levi-Strauss and all of that shit is any good.

Maybe there is hope for Bergson, but I've yet to read him.

>>17351810
Descartes and pascal were instrumental to modern math and philosophy. Malebranche wasn't bad either

>>17351816
Instrumental? I'd rather say detrimental. Descartes is one of the shallowest philosophers of the entire Europe, at least to me.

Pascal is cute, but I see him more like an aphorist than a philosopher.

>>17351810
>reddit spacing
>meme answer
nothing new under the sun

>>17351827
>using memes from the summer of 2014

>>17351824
Descartes invented analytic geometry and pascal did probability or had a helping hand in it. Fuck napoleon actually made some math discoveries but even outside that and their influences in math descartes and the French not only provided a metaphysical skip down the road but they harbored the rationalist movement which culminated in Spinoza, Leibniz and Kant primarily and analytic philosophy secondarily.

>>17351839
>they harbored the rationalist movement which culminated in Spinoza, Leibniz and Kant primarily and analytic philosophy secondarily
And you see it as a good thing?

>>17351831
I would have thought that a reader of Guenon would have a little more consideration for traditional memes. You probably haven't read one single author you said you disliked though, so your comprehension of such things must be a bit limited.

>>17351846
Which part? Kant is the foundation of German idealism and continentalism and contrasted in existentialism and analytic philosophy. In a sense we can be grateful we have a computer by the rationalists except tertiarily