[ 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: 41 KB, 328x499, 51PI7C8cLML._SX326_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11785993 No.11785993 [Reply] [Original]

Damn, even by speculate realist standards this shit is out there

>> No.11786005
File: 33 KB, 328x499, 51WoNgdyWIL._SX326_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11786005

try this

>> No.11786021
File: 38 KB, 263x400, 11451842.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11786021

this too. especially good if you like D&G

>> No.11786041

>>11786005
>>11786021
Thanks I'll take a look, especially Stengers. I've noticed a lot of similarities with D&G

>> No.11786053
File: 20 KB, 306x475, 440366.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11786053

>>11786041
deleuze was apparently super-impressed with P&R and stengers gives frequents shout-outs to D&G throughout that book. pic rel is just a cozy read too. whitehead is way way cool

>> No.11786153

>>11785993
Left my copy on a plane five years ago. Still have a sore bottom over it.

>> No.11786819

>>11785993
sell me on this book. it sounds like some endgame shit but i'm probably too much of a brainlet for it

>> No.11787482

>>11786819
Seconding this. Also what about other Whitehead outside of this book? Can we get a flow chart or something going?

>> No.11787495

Have his books on my to-read list. Is this dude a system builder?

>> No.11787691

Objects or definitions are not permanent and are of themselves in the process of becoming themselves. Kind of similar to Deleuze/Nick Land's ideas but even weirder. Geometric pancreativism?

>> No.11787734

>>11785993
>Anglo analytic gets disillusioned with autism philosophy and thinks so hard that he hits continental philosophy from the other side

>> No.11788397

>>11785993
Never read anything so incomprehensible

>> No.11789297

>>11787691
Tell me more about this geometric pancreativism.

>> No.11789328

How can you hope to understand process ontology with words in a book?

>> No.11789331

Process philosopher would say that object is defined by their flow: infinite occasions of consecutive experiences of all objects with one another and creating each other's flow teleoplexically. Each "person" or "object" is defined by their unique list of all those experiences, according to process philosophy. Very complicated. It is 'analytical metaphysics'.

>> No.11789336

>>11789331
Also it's 'God' mediating everything as the independent observer.

>> No.11789356

process ontology is incompatible with worded explanations of it

>> No.11789382

>>11789331
This sounds like boring empiricism desu. Which, coming from an *nglo, doesn't sound at all surprising.

>> No.11789553

>>11789382
well ultimately it is metaphysics but realistic

>> No.11789682

>>11787495
Prima facie, yes, although he could also be read in a similar manner to late Wittgenstein, a lot of phenomenology, and contemporary philosophy of mind along the lines of the whole embodied cognition/enactivism trend.

>> No.11789685

>>11789331
The only thing analytic about Whitehead's work is Principia Mathematica.

>> No.11790839

>>11785993
So should I start with this or something else?

>> No.11790859

>>11790839
It's fascinating stuff, definitely worth a read. Maybe read
>>11786005
along side since it's basically incomprehensible

>> No.11792005

>>11790859
For you maybe.

>> No.11792041

>>11792005
it's widely regarded as one of if not the most obscure texts in all of 20th century philosophy

>> No.11792078

I just read the wikipedia page. Why read this? It wreaks of wankery

>> No.11792435

>>11792041
Whatever you say brainlets.

>> No.11792526

>>11792435
if you don't think it was difficult, you neither read closely nor understood the book

>> No.11792533

>>11792526
I understood it and read closely.

>> No.11792538

>>11792533
>>11792526
Somebody's really over-estimating their own intelligence here.

>> No.11792575

All these people in the thread who "get it" but none of them can elucidate anything of what he said.

>> No.11792791

>>11792575
you can't put it into words

>> No.11792883

To the mind of God all truths are analytic.

>> No.11792923

>>11792791
How did Whitehead do it? Charades?

>> No.11793295

>>11792078
Because it is objective truth.

>> No.11793363

>>11787734
kek

>> No.11793385

>>11792791
you can't put it into words since they are no longer the same words

>> No.11793415

>>11787734
fukken lol

>> No.11793416

>>11787734
rofl