/lit/ - Literature

>>9165888
After the romans, yes

Before Kierkegaard, yes.

After the DFWians, yes.

>>9165888
Yeah. Sans the sloppy 'cumming' part. It's therefore morelike tantric NEVERENDING masturbation..

Pretty much everything that has to do with a Philosophy degree is masturbation.

Anyone who is philosophizing for anything but answers is masturbating.

After the mydiarydesuians, yes.

>>9165888
obligatory "anything post-Wittgenstein is masturbatory garbage" post

>>9165934
Only correct answer

>>>/sci/

Yes and no. Philosophers have to have some way to test their theories and axioms. The best way to do that Is to construct abstract hypothetical boundaries for their propositions (I.E, Question: What makes a person the same person? Hypothetical Boundary: Is an exact copy of someone the same person? If so, what are the implications?) Obviously we can't make exact copies of people (yet?) but we have to ask these things to set precedent.

It becomes mental masturbation when the axioms and hypothetical situations in question have no practical application.

>>9166753
>lawwwwjik
>good
>muh practicality
>good

>>9165934

It's actually anything post-Nietzsche.

Philosophy died on the year 1900.

What followed was post-modernist/structuralist French pseud-hacks on the one hand, and autistic pseudo-mathematical analytic Anglo-Saxons on the other.

ITT: Pseuds who think another person can "give" you philosophy.

>>9165888
>is it
Sometimes.
>nothing more than.
No.

who cares? you still orgasm

>>9166768

The frog actually gets it right.

My god.

>>9165888
No, its purpose is to seek knowledge which can be used to guide proper action.

Obviously it can get masturbatory just like anything else, but that's the realm of pseuds.

>>9165888
Is masturbation nothing else than corporeal philosophy?

>>9166768
Fuck, frog is correct.

>>9165888
philosophers are tourists, scientists are explorers

>>9165898
>
>>9165907
>>9165908
>>9165930
t. reddittors who think that repeating a joke a thousand times makes it funnier.

>>9168441
Philosophers are generals, scientists are soldiers.

>>9168460
Scientists don't listen to philosophers, philosophers are more like "redpilled" /r9k/ virgins, and scientists are chads.

>>9165888
Any philosophy that isn't mine is nothing more than mental masturbation, yes

>>9168462
Scientists who don't listen to philosophers are shitty scientists.

>>9168460
+1

>>9168462
Science built the atomic bomb, but it's philosophy that determines when to employ their use.

>>9168460
Philosophers are juicy cheeseburgers while scientists are the fries on the side.

>>9168441
>"ooga booga where the empirical evidence at"
scientists are literally the blacks of the intellectual disciplines

Is masturbation a bad thing? Feels pretty good to me.

>>9168519
OH EM GEE, anon, TEE EM EYE!

>>9168507

>>9166768
>>9166794
>>9168440
Only people who pretend to be "deep" and "philosophical" uphold Nietzsche.

He's basically a pleb filter.

>>9168827
Sure, kiddo.
Now go watch TV.

>>9165888
Philosophy for philosophy's sake is ego-wank, yeah. However I would make the argument that using philosophy as a lens through which to analyse contemporaneous history holds some merit.

>>9165888
How about you stop worrying about whether philosophy is practical and enjoy it for what it is. A lot of the autists here with inferiority complexes to /sci/ might not like that but so be it.