/lit/ - Literature

>>5817381
>Heraclitus
>starting with the Greeks
shiggy

>>5817381
Weird. Heraclitus is prescientific. wouldn't it be a bigger surprise if he DID make scientific sense? I say this as a physics major myself.

>>5817381
>spent with the physics majors arguing with the professor about how stupid Heraclitus is and how he doesn't make any scientific sense

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientism

if I ever had to deal with that I'd probably shoot up the school. So I just avoid all philosophy classes except Eastern philosophy, which is in the religion department where no fedoras dare venture.

>>5817390
>reading things in terms of "scientific" and "prescientific"
iseriouslyhopeyouguysdontdothis

>>5817381
sometimes, you need to be the one to tell the other students to shut the fuck up an let the professor talk

peer pressure is more effective than authority pressure

>>5817381
>Parmenides
>unfolds

nice

>>5817395
We have to take History of Scientific Thought class in grad school. They break it down that way there.

>>5817381
>studying literature in school system
Why?

>>5817394
why do i get the impression that /lit/ are all skinny dudes sitting in the front corner to hide from too much attention and being unwilling to speak up?

just sit up front and if needed, help guide the professor to continue and your fellow students to stop tipping so hard. your professor will like you

>>5817431
Why not?

>>5817433
>why do i get the impression that /lit/ are all skinny dudes sitting in the front corner to hide from too much attention and being unwilling to speak up?
Because it helps reinforce your pigeonhole based weltanschauung which provides convenient ad hominem attacks that you can use to silence opposing views with little to no effort

You've seen nothing mate.
Wait until ARISTOTLE

Enjoy arguing about matter and from, and even better : enjoy Z and all the discussions whether or not you can divide something in parts

>>5817444
#rekt

>>5817409
10/10 observation

>>5817444
Is that what I'm doing in this thread?

Considering that's exactly what you're doing, I'm a little suspicious of you right now.

>>5817395
The alternative is you get people trying to claim pre-scientific philosophical contributions as scientific contributions and the labeling of pre-scientific philosophers as "proto-scientists."

>>5817433
>First day in beginning Physics class,
>Basic Mechanical Principles and the Fundamentals of Motion section.
>three Humanities majors say nothing
>because they're not there
>existentialism

>>5817438
Because this shit happens. If it doesn't you're still subject to your teacher's bias (which can be good or bad but it's mostly bad).
The only advantage to studying humanities subjects in universities is that you are provided with a list of stuff you have to read among literature and manuals, whereas if you're doing it by yourself you have to find this stuff with no external help.
I just think it's counterproductive to pay grad education for humanities unless you are 100% sure it's going to land you a job (which is something I don't like either, by the way, but it's the state of things).

>>5817450
>Considering that's exactly what you're doing
>no u
lol k

>>5817444
>Because it helps reinforce your pigeonhole based weltanschauung which provides convenient ad hominem attacks that you can use to silence opposing views with little to no effort

# B T F O
B
T
F
O

>>5817455
>baseless implications
There's no reason to believe that people outside of STEM fetishize the word "science" and think that historical figures without the tag of "scientist" attached to them would render their contributions are meaningless

>>5817471
>I just think it's counterproductive to pay grad education for humanities
>implying I don't get paid to study
>not living in a welfare state

>be a stemfag
>have a (guy) friend at a Women and Genders studies class
>sat in one class, admire at the demographics
>99% hot lib chicks 0.9% faggots 0.1% cool guy (me)
>issues raised about aborigine being oppressed by corporation
>instead of a holistic view, it zooms in to the persepective of old hags which have little say in the matters
>no interview from chief
>sjws start raising hands and blurts out something passionate
>I realize all of the problems here are trivial, made-up, 'humanities-based',
>Realize im doing good work doing my masters in AI development
>realize this and play along and raise my hand and emulate my peer's passion and words
>get claps and eyes from all students (including gays)
>after class a few students come up to me and (rudely) comment about my sexuality
>assume Im gay,
>I say im straight but have a soft-heart
>one gay guy says, "what's the difference?"

>mfw

>>5817492
The only people who care treat science religiously, it seems

Just state loudly you would like to actually be on schedule with the lecture for once since you want some actual notes and thoughts to be taken from it in place of dry fruitless 'discussion'
I had some mature students (50+) in my freshman year and they kept making unwarranted noise. Extremely disruptive, possibly due to thinking that seniority gave them a certain equivalence with the lecturer. Eventually they were gently told to shut up. Your lecturer should do the same.

>>5817518
2.7/10

>>5817518
two questions:
1- is your friend gay
2- are there really 1000 people in that class
regards,
anon

>>5817607
>tfw 24 and same hair as a 65 year old Hegel

>>5817381

>Uni of Melbourne
>2012
>first day of uni, first day of my philosophy elective
>lecturer is talking about Descartes and doubt
>notice the guy sitting next to me scribbling furiously, with a big smug grin on his face
>sneak a glance at what he's written
>it says 'haha WOW like do philosophers JUST hypothesize'
>pokerface.jpg
>throughout the lecture he continues muttering smugly to himself, something along the lines of 'muh science'
>it turns out that I'm in the same tutorial as this guy
>ohboyherewego.jpg
>first three weeks my fancy headwear'd friend doesn't understand any of the discussion, gets blown the fuck out by the tutor (a philosophy/mathematics phd) when he does
>after 3rd week just sullenly smirks in the corner
>doesn't say anything else all semester, except one time he said 'Nietzsche was a fascist right' from out of nowhere, in an ethics discussion (muh trolley dilemma)
>mfw I got a high distinction in that class
>haven't seen my STEM master race overlord since

Fun times.

>>5817461
It's strange how some people choose to not waste time on trivia when the fundamentals are innate and the specifics are irrelevant (to their chosen fields of study.)

>>5817600
1 - I think so? he never officially came out. I always thought it suspect that he would major in such a program. His excuse is he wanted to do an easy major so he could get a good law position after undergrad. I think he's just gay. He dropped out though, thinking of going to acting.

2 - There was a good auditorium-full of people, probably less than 300 people.

Why u ask?

>>5817450
If you have to engage in a fallacy in order to bring to light another fallacy that's a flaw in the system, not the user-logic. His point stands.

>>5817630
>...choose to not waste time on trivia

The trivia are Grammar, Logic and Rhetoric. A Humanities major should know that.

>>5817636

>not being an Inhumanities major

Goyim are you even trying?

>>5817632
Cause of the stats u gave ya doofua

>>5817643
>>>/pol/

>>5817654

>>>/nou/

>>5817634
that's not how that works, dude

nor did he even label a proper fallacy

are all americans this way?

>>5817500
>implying you do get paid to study
It's called taxes, you mongoloid. What, did you really believe your education was FREE? Jesus christ.

>>5817518
>AI
>computer science

opinion disregarded, go take a shower

>>5817664
>taxes
Yeah, I barely pay any.

>>5817679
>Yeah, I barely pay any.
Yeah, but you will pay lots of them for the rest of your life.

>>5817685
>>5817679

This is top tier repartee, really.

>>5817518
>0.1% cool guy (me)

>>5817685
>Yeah, but you will pay lots of them for the rest of your life.

Sure. And I'm happy to.

>>5817685
This wouldn't really be a problem if Mitt Romney and Warren Buffet weren't paying less than middle class earners in taxes, and if the money was actually providing services to the people being taxed.

>>5817704
Mitt Romney is a fat gay lmao

>>5817703
>he likes being robbed
Top fucking kek. Now you're going to tell me taxes aren't stealing, right?

I bet you're either Swedish, Norwegian, Danish or Finnish.

>>5817704

But the internet told me that Buffet gibs all hes money to charity! Buffet good guy! Buffet stand up for the little guy!

>>5817717
Does that make you uncomfortable?

>>5817667
>implying im CS

CE undergrad, fool

>>5817720
>Does that make you uncomfortable?
What? That you don't realize that taxes are theft or that you are northern european?

>>5817660
You mean other than the ad hominems and the disregard for opinion without verification of source?
And yes, it is how it works. You argue within the bounds of the system available. Both the original argument and your followup post indicate you didn't know this. I was simply informing you anon.

>>5817742
I don't think it's theft. I imagine in a veil of ignorance kind of situation it would be reasonable to use taxes to guarantee healthcare, education, etc. etc.

>>5817742
Taxes aren't theft but protection pay. Still coercion but I'm at least getting something out of it. Spending 10x on military in a country costs some chunks of change mang.

>>5817742
>lolbertarian detected

>all these faggots preventing me from buying another tv so they can get a fancy high falutin 'education'

Absolutely disgusting. Fuck teachers, doctors, lawyers, architects and engineers. Hang the lot of them I say.

>>5817760
>I don't think it's theft.
It is though. Besides, the highwayman only claims your property and flees, whilst the state claims your property AND forces it's retarded antics on you, whilst legitimizing it by claiming "it's for the good of the collective/your own good".

A robber deserves more respect than the tax man.

>>5817772
>he thinks I'm a libertarian
Libertarians want a state and taxation, you fucking idiot. You could atleast bother checking the wikipedia entry before commenting about matters that you have no clue about.

>>5817746
tldr

>>5817796
>analchist detected

>>5817796

This is like the political equivalent of 'get my pronouns right, cis scum'

>>5817796
>muh feels

>>5817787
Go live in the Libertarian paradise of Somalia, then.
You'll have plenty of robbers to respect, and no taxmen.

>>5817381
Ugh. I hate sciencefags who pretend that philosophy and literature are pointless. I used to be one of those smug elitists. God forbid we recognise that practically all of human development is built on top of itself, as opposed to some amorphous blob, where discovery just sprouts arbitrarily.

>>5817841

You have a good chance of converting some of them if you point out the massive importance of Spinoza for Einstein, or of Husserl and Leibniz for Goedel, and so on.

>>5817787
Hold up a second, are you trying to argue that all taxation is theft, or only in scenarios of disproportion? The latter point I could agree with, that students and people from low-income families are being subject to an almost punitive quantity of demand that ultimately inhibits progress. But surely taxes have a place in society, it's what enables the cash flow of a nation and homogenises the economy.

>>5817855
I don't know why more of my STEM schoolmates don't have a raging boner for Spinoza.

>>5817866

Fedoras can't into panentheism.

>>5817866
UNFALSIFIABLE NONSENSE

>>5817873

>mfw they can't even tell me who Karl Popper is when they say this

>>5817873
Just because you're too stupid to falsify it doesn't mean it is.

>>5817855
I agree, and maybe I will, though whenever I (or others) have brought up Einstein's beliefs, whether it be on religion, politics or philosophy, the most common response is that scientists' opinions should be generally ignored, if not in regards to their particular field of achievement. As though we're all not capable of thought.

>>5817879

I was referring more to metaphysics, and how a theory of physics necessarily implicates some sort of metaphysical view. I'm not a specialist, so don't take this as gospel, but it's pretty widely accepted that reading Spinoza had a substantial direct impact on Einstein's physics. Or so I've heard.

>>5817879
the theory of relativity is unfalsifiable - IT'S jibberish

>>5817892

Thank you Mr Carnap.

>>5817892
How so? Are all things that are currently not disproved, considered unfalsifiable? Or is something being unfalsifiable a permanent state?

Wouldn't a particle with mass travelling at the speed of light break the Theory of Relativity? Or at least cause heavy revisions in things as far back as Electromagnetism?

Not trying to be a dick, just genuinely a little lost - which happens every time I come here.

>>5817918

Falsifiable: my thoughts are caused by a little man inside my head pressing buttons.

Unfalsifiable: the entire universe, including my apparent memories of the past, was created through divine intervention fifteen minutes ago

>>5817632
You are an enormous faggot who will never amount to anything

>>5817953
>never amount to anything

>not a native english speaker
>hear this expression in a pornographic obscure fetish flick
>think of it every time I hear/read it
>have to fight the boner

>>5817381
Science dogmatists are shit.

Just remember that those sorts of students eventually switch majors, actual science and mathematics are deeply intertwined with philosophy.

I can't even discuss mathematics on /sci/ because it's filled with science-worshiping teenagers who think they know more than a man with two BS degrees and years of independent study.
Any thought beyond "hey i saw this happen a bunch of times so its gotta always happen" is too much for them.

>>5817381
Where do you go to school where you are just starting a semester?

>>5817629
Ahh unimelb. What a shithole.

>>5818140
Ethiopia

>>5817855

Go on....

>>5817381
What kind of philosophy professor puts up with that?

>>5818252
She's an autist, basically. Brilliant mind, but socially inept.

>>5817381
University is honestly not that hard. Unless you're retarded, you can do the readings for your arts electives. Physics isn't even the most work intensive degree.

>>5817796
damn, my dude, VERY hot takes!

>>5817878
doesn't mean it is what? poor construction.

>>5817518
Look guys, fictional stories from people who have never stepped inside a social "science" class.

So creative and utter bullshit, here let me help you.

>Be in our capstone Anthro theory course.
>We're covering Focault.
>This fucking kid raises his hand and starts shouting about the oppressive white man like he always does.
>Everyone in class rolling their eyes, clearly not interested in his droning on about white men being biologically inclined to oppress and rape.
>Professor cuts him off and basically tells him he's being a shit anthropologist.

Any form of extremism is not accepted by the grand majority of academics.

I am a Physics major and everyone else I know in my major is dogmatically anti-philosophy
I was in a class on Seneca last Semester and me and a Catholic were really into the class discussions
What may be surprising is that I was more than not against Stoisicm
I am constantly thinking I am either in the perfect or the absolutely wrong major

Well, to be fair, that's probably about as high-quality a discussion as you can reasonably expect in a 100-level class.

The best part is that STEMfags could easily slide into Analytic Philosophy and proceed from there, but either choose not to or are totally unaware and ignorant of Analytics.

The result is silly Scientism that has no real place in either STEM or the Humanities.

>>5818933

Yeah, this. I think a lot of this new breed of what I would call paleopositivism (insofar as it is the most primitive possible form of positivism) stems from a willful ignorance of those segments of philosophy one might actually be interested in. These folks have already made up their minds that philosophy is dead because Dr. Hawking told them so, and by God (or lack thereof), they will not allow anything to convince them otherwise. As a staunch Analytic, it does signal to me that we are still progressing as a society that this very old and ill-defined version of positivism has finally filtered into society at large, and it makes me look ahead to when, let us say a century from now, the more refined Analytic views are in vogue among the well-educated, but for the moment, goddamn it's annoying.

>>5818933
>>5818988
how does analytic philosophy differ from scientism?

im aware that one is a 'field' of philosophy, and the other is more an attitude about truth, but since im ignorant of it mostly id like to hear from someone with more knowledge

>>5817444
BLOOOOOOWN THE FUUUUUUUCK OUUUUUUUUUUUUUT

>>5819035

You just stated the main difference. They're different categories. Scientism might well be ENTERTAINED by an Analytic philosopher (though whoever did would be, in my opinion, a second-rate philosopher), but Analytic philosophy is not a belief, nor indeed a belief system. It is just that side of philosophy (practiced primarily by Anglophones in first-world nations) which champions rigor, well-argued points, systematicity, concision without vagueness, and (usually) the methods of mathematics and the mathematical sciences (though this does not necessarily mean a belief in the superiority of the natural sciences, and indeed in the contemporary Analytic dialogue it usually does not. The kind of new Quinian positivism that's been popular for the past few decades views philosophy and science as not being substantially different things, and is thus, in my opinion, a very inclusive and relatively hippy-dippy view of philosophy's place, as compared to what was popular prior to Quine, even if it is championed by some very stuffy old white fellas who don't at all give off the air of people who think natural science and philosophy don't just go hand-in-hand but are in fact different segments of the same spectrum of thought.) If you've got any interest at all in the humanities OR the sciences, I think you'd be doing yourself a huge disservice in not checking out Analytic philosophy. In my opinion, it is infinitely more engaging and "enlightening" than Continental "philosophy."

>>5817629
Why would you go to umelb to study philosophy?

>>5817444

rekt and check'd

>>5817444
I'd lose my trip if I were annihilated like this. Something worth considering, >>5817433.

>>5818126
As a mathematics student, let me assure you, most physicists and mathematicians find no use for philosophy.
I have gone through most of the great philosophical works connected to Science, logic and Mathematics and have found that none of them helped me understand mathematics or the physical sciences any better. There was no connection between Spinoza and SR/GR that I could determine, the only connection I could find was Spinoza mimicking the structure of Euclid's elements.

>>5817444
>Weltanschauung
Oh, ist das jetzt ein Ding, wie Schadenfreude?

>>5818894
Dude you don't think I've read Crossroads and explored the mistreatment of other people in the past? People are fucked. Feminist blame men; Nazi blame jew.

>>5819172
But are you an applied math student or an actual math student?

I found a lot of use in studying analytic philosophy while getting my now regrettable and useless degree in pure math.

>>5819312
Wow stop using german loanwords so much, guys.

>>5817444

>>5819575
>TF2
Thanks for triggering me, shitlord. I loved the game back when it came out before all this f2p bullshit happened.

>>5818933
tfw want to switch major from STEM (on leave from school right now but can end up in pretty much any physical science or math related major upon returning) to analytic phil but sandnigger family would stop paying for my school otherwise.

I get along so well with my phil profs and classmates too. My STEM classmates are raging autists or Indian.

Considering giving them my word that I'd attend law school to justify it.

>>5817433
i am a fat bastard who never shut up.

>>5817444
absolutely rekt

>>5817381
it´s like saying homer is sexist, a really stupid stance to take if you want to understand human history

>>5819692
all the philosophers up until our extremely enlightened time were sexist, don't you know that anon!

>>5817938
You are arguing a priori and a posteriori without even knowing it. Read some Kant.