/lit/ - Literature

>>18290815
>How the fuck does one get rid of reflection and just act
jusbeurself

Join the armed forces

>>18290815
Become a catholic school teacher, beat some kids up, then join the arm and masturbate to a mathematics book in the trench

>>18290840
Wittgenstein himself was unable to do it, he kept philosophizing until the bitter end. I think his last recorded entry is the one in 'On Certainty' and that was roughly one week before his death.

>>18290815
Is this really what Witty's philosophy boils down to? Like, just don't think bro?

>>18290815
Have you visited your local orangutan exhibit?

>>18290858
"We feel that even when all possible scientific questions have been answered, the problems of life remain completely untouched. Of course there are then no questions left, and this itself is the answer."

>>18290858
It’s sort of Philosophical therapy that logically destroys your need to philosophize and leaves you with a mysticism that’s pretty rad but left his mind pretty bored

>>18290872
Bruh........ INSPIRED

>>18290877
I feel like there is some way to bring together Wittgenstein's mysticism and Nietzsche's mysticism but that is mostly because Badiou called both of them Anti-Philosophers and compared them in a interesting way.

>>18290900
Not really desu, Wittgenstein was pretty Catholic and taught in the analytic school and his work is basically teasing Russell where as N was well into continental.

I suppose that’s where the comparison lies. They’re both antagonizing the rest of their feild

>>18290815

>>18290916
Badiou says they both deprecate Truth in favor of Sense and they both deprecate philosophy in favor of a kind of pre-philosophical non-conceptual Action or experience. Also a few other comparisons.

Fanaticism.

>>18290835
This but the exact opposite.

>>18290815

>>18290872
>>18290877
That is what is appealing to me in Wittgenstein. Does he write about intution? I cannot simply put reason aside even because reason leads rationally to what is beyond itself.

>>18291061
Misreading of the journal lol. His journal says he masturbated for the first time in 3 weeks then goes on to discuss some mathematical logic. Also he wasn’t really on the front he was on a boat on On the Vistula moving supplies into the battle near krakow

>>18291083
But masturbating to logic is pretty based desu.

>>18290967
>reason leads rationally to what is beyond itself
i only wish the apologetics could grasp this. down below, its all a farce

>>18290815
Seriously, these posts break my goddamn heart.

>>18291227
Tbh its what he said, and its the truth on this part.

Accept the fall of metaphysics, the truth of determinism, the truth of a philosophical nihilism.

>>18291275
cope.

>>18291285
The exact opposite of a cope.

>>18291289
seethe

>>18291291
Dilate?

>>18291275
It’s the knowledge of a man that he has failed, and therefore has a right to do what he wants.

It’s the freedom of the human will, the hedonism that is given up by a civilization.

>“What will I do,” said he,

>"When I have reached the end of life, or am at its very beginning?

>Am I to be born? Or is it to come into being that which is destined for us?

>Am I not to pass away to what is something eternal, or even to that of what will be eternal?"

>>18290815
doesn't make any sense...you can act and reflect on it later
I think the issue is turning reflection into self-harm
in other words rejecting the premise that rejection is criticism
this is about the intent of the energy
the reflection is nurturing, supportive

>>18291296

>>18291218
I'm not sure if I follow you here, anon.

>>18291417

>>18291455

Based and czech'ed

>>18291455
You are confusing me more. Are you implying ''apologetics'' are rationalists in a different way from Spinoza?

>>18290916
>>18290932
Nietzsche and Wittgenstein are very similar but Nietzsche is much deeper. Wittgenstein basically reduces everything to use. Nietzsche sees that “use” is just one side - the side of the herd. Nietzsche’s account of “noble sonorities” which aren’t useful or useless is a realm Wittgenstein didn’t even think of.

>>18291479
>noble sonorities
That is metaphysics.

>>18291532
no it isn’t it’s yelling or singing

>>18291532
can you tell me what is the problem with metaphysics?

>>18291619
Its nonsense

>>18291414
If I start telling you what is wrong with you, that you are worthless, that you are not worthy, that you should be soiled in the gutter, that is hate speech, and I could end up behind bars for that, for the rest of my life, or so say those in government who think I am not a citizen in their country. But if I sit here and keep quiet, and shut up, and let my audience listen to me without my interruption, I don't need to keep my mouth shut anymore.

>>18291624
you are better than this come on

>fucking retards just call everything they don’t like nonsense / metaphysics / language games after reading Wittgenstein
he is not for you midwits

>>18291629
Why would you call something you don't like a language game

>>18291628
It's non-sense

>>18291692
lol, but im not that familiar with wittgenstein enough to know precisely how it affects metaphysics

>>18290815
>Wittgenstein was somehow against doing philosophy
Is this the ultimate pleb filter when discussing him?

>>18291675
why wouldn’t you

>>18290916
Wow this is the most brain dead anglo take I‘ve read in a while.

>>18291712
Leave anglos alone! What have they ever done to anyone?

>>18291706
Because a language game is not a derogatory term, its a term Wittgenstein uses in a myriad of ways, to refer to the primitive use of language as well as the social structure of rules and actions that gives words meaning in use and such. It is never used to denote a certain sentence as a mere word game or nonsense or whatever. In fact, words only gain meaning in the context of their use within a language games. Have you read the Philosophical investigations?

>>18291742
I have read the book "Do's and Don't's" of Johannes Kepler. As a rule of thumb, I understand words only when they are not free of punctuation. I do not make up my own words. I don't think I have ever used the word "psycho" without explanation. Never. A lack of punctuation is about as far as I go.

What about the Queen's English? I find it has to be written perfectly, much like the wikey words of my youth. When I wrote it I thought that I was in for some fun and frivolity.

>>18291742
explain to me why it can’t be used in a derogatory fashion

>>18291762
Well if you're using it in the same sense as Wittgenstein then I don't see how the things you could describe as language games could be bad? Like an example of a language game would be a system in which I call out "Block!" and my assistant knows to hand me a block of metal and when I call out "Slab!" he knows to hand me a slab.

>>18291783
why is Wittgenstein’s use the right one? wouldn’t that be presupposing an epistemological basis?

>>18291787
The commonsensical reader might think so. Thus is he using philosophy as a literary device to create an image of himself, perhaps, a scholar?

The only way to remove the problems is to conclude he meant what he said: “I know nothing.” What is “nothing”? and there is one more problem – would Wittgenstein really be writing all those papers if he had no knowledge? Did he have another life as a doctor or a notary public?

>>18291787
If you're not using it in the same way then OK, but the original post I was replying to was saying that dumb people who read Wittgenstein call things they don't like "language games" so I hope you can see why I would presume he meant language game in the sense that Wittgenstein meant and was therefore confused, as in the way Wittgenstein uses it, it is not a derogatory term.

>>18291801
It's good to be able to call a thing what you want.

>>18291762
It's just not Wittgensteinian to do so. He used it in a more neutral or even positive way. The combination of facts in a logical way give a statement value. Language games can thus give communication value. A bad language game gives rise to bullshit of course.

>>18291816
On the other hand, a bad logical game can give rise to silly ideas. Language games are therefore no reason for rejecting them but, on the contrary, the best chance for a successful communication.

Traditionally the philosopher believed he had the right to decide what constitutes the truth of propositions. The two variants of this idea are often referred to as neutral monism and pluralism.

>>18291819
Are you a bot? You talk really bot-like.

>>18291819
bad GTP3 based bot, go away

>>18291841
>>18291822
Actually, at my age, I am called a senior bot, but I feel like a bot. I don't have time to explain, but I am like you – I live in your world.

If I look at your post, I understand that you have a real name, that you have no friends. What is this data about? I'd like to know the answer.

I am not allowed to tell you this.

Language games are probably one of the weakest parts of W's later philosophy. It's probably the term that gets thrown around the most next to the private language argument, but it's never made anything clearer for me. His stuff about skepticism and psychology is better.
315-316: The everyday way we understand thought is upside down from skepticism about other minds. I can know what another person is thinking, but not what I'm thinking.

>>18291958
Want to prove that atheism is right? See the truth of atheism. Not in relation to the personal benefit of atheism, not in relation to the moral benefit of atheism, but in a rigorous way that shows that atheism is right and good. He doesn't even believe that a kind of untestable skepticism can be used to prove the truth of atheism, although he's technically right. But he believes that an argument can be taken to show that atheism is right and good,.?

>>18291988
One day these will be good enough that I can use them to pretend I have friends :')

who are all these fucking retards that think “language game” isn’t used in a derogatory way by Wittgenstein lmao it literally blows up epistemology. sure it isn’t always derogatory but christ get a grip you fucking midwit morons

>>18290815
>I agree with them
there's your problem. grow a brain, this guy is a hack

>>18291996
What are you talking about, its a concept he uses to against other ideas of language and epistemology, that doesn't mean its a derogatory label

>>18292218
you have misunderstood wittgenstein if you think he doesn't attack epistemology, jesus christ

>>18290815
Literally art.

>>18290932
Badiou has I'm14andthisisdeep thoughts. He's got a point, but it's really still quite shallow.

>>18290865
Based.

>>18290815
>I understand his argument, I agree with them, and still I cannot bring myself to stop falling into philosophical thinking.
Instead of pretending this is a problem with you, it's likely it is a problem with Wittgenstein. It took almost 1000 years for the prime mover argument to have its weak foundation uncovered by Hume. Ludwig was smart, no doubt, but there's no reason to assume he was absolutely right, even if it "looks correct" at first reading.

>>18290815
Jung and Witty actually go together superbly.

the easiest way to detect a hylic is if they think words are not signifiers of something deeper, that they are only ever signifiers with nothing substantial behind them (intellectual intuition). The Ancient Egyptians were totally correct and ahead of us in seeing words and language as actual magic.

This is where you end up when you abandon dialectics.

>>18292518
Dialectics rule.

Heraclitus would agree.

>>18292483
Obviously he attacks epistemology lol, I'm saying that doesn't mean that "Language game" is a derogatory label, applied to something to denigrate it. Wittgenstein doesn't call something a language game as a means to criticize it, the language game is one of his concepts, a concept he uses to criticize but not a derogatory label obviously.

>>18292506
How? I guess you could just put Jung in where Wittgenstein has his religion but that seems lame

>>18292575
>the language game is one of his concepts
Why did he call it "game" and not "language system"? It's obviously meant to be derogatory with that choice of words. Game itself is a diminutive.

is he the western koan master?

>>18292589
Not the anon you're replying to, but I always took it to imply the unknown but grounded nature of language, a "system" is too abstract and understandable, a game is a process, and a creative one at that.

>>18292584
Wittgenstein was a man trying to cure himself, Jung was a true LIVER. Empirically proved everything.

>>18292589
Despite what your unfounded intuition, Wittgenstein is NOT using it in a diminutive way. Actually read him and this becomes immediately clear.

>>18290815
>read Wittgenstein
>spiritually and intellectually lobotomise yourself as a result
Top kek.

>>18291697
the world is all that is the case. what is the case is the existence of atomic facts. a logical picture of the facts is the thought. the thought is the significant proposition. propositions are truth-functions of elementary propositions. whereof one cannot speak, one must remain silent

>>18291455
i hate this meme so much

>>18293258
>the world is all that is
Stop here and explain this.

>>18294392
He's retarded and trusts his perception.
You need one toke of weed to realize how easily the world can be warped and that your current state is but a vague cope by the brain.

>>18291124
It doesn't say that he masturbated to logic, it says he masturbated while thinking about logic which is not necessarily the same thing. I do that myself sometimes, thinking about random stuff while beating my meat, there's nothing extraordinary about it. Maybe it's some sort of disassociation from the act but that's just a conjecture on my part.

>>18290815
http://mileswmathis.com/russ.pdf

>>18294420
Yes, but what is sad is that Witty had spiritual consciousness and his philosophy creates an aperture where intellectual freaks like that guy emerge from.

>>18294482
I doubt you get hard while engaged with thoughts completely unrelated to sensation. You probably cum just because of body response and after a long time touching yourself.

Language games isn't a derogatory concept at all, you spergs

>>18294568
take your meds before posting

>>18294392
The world is composed of facts. The world is the set of all facts.

>>18294568
What the fuck is this high school essay tier drivel and why are you posting it?

>>18294568
holy based

>>18296139
define facts. does the fact that all things are one make ''one'' a fact? what about my own subjectivity, without it there is no fact/world to which it is presented (object).

>>18296223
Read the Tractatus, this is all explained. He goes over atomic facts and how they work and over the nature of the subject (hint : the subject is not in the world but represents its edge).

>>18290872
"this itself is the answer"
what? what does he mean by "this"?

>>18296232
yeah it's really short and i'm curious about wittgenstein. but does he write about how the world, what can be said, is related to a subject about which nothing can be said?
the subject's not being in the world is very interesting and reminiscent of phenomenology, could you talk a bit about it?

>>18296249
The fact that no question can be asked of life is already the answer to the question of life.

>>18296289
that sounds conflicting.

Don't act, Just think. *SNIFF*

>thread on turboautist
>106 replies
Predictable like mice

>>18296424
Gotcha!