So did Derrida pretty much prove that it's impossible to know the meaning of words or what. Did anybody disprove him compellingly? If he's right then what's the basis of our literature and our codified laws?

File: 31 KB, 250x289, derrida.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Anonymous Fri Mar 9 10:38:38 2018 No.10818127 [Reply] [Original]

So did Derrida pretty much prove that it's impossible to know the meaning of words or what. Did anybody disprove him compellingly?

If he's right then what's the basis of our literature and our codified laws?

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 9 10:39:35 2018 No.10818132 >>10818127 J. Peterson has made him irrelevent.

Anonymous Fri Mar 9 10:44:08 2018 No.10818146

Derrida just immanentizes meaning and makes it dialogical, same with Wittgenstein and most other Heideggerians

You already know the meanings of words. He is just telling you that you can't know them any more than you already know them in that way. There is no magical essence of a word standing outside it and making it make sense. The magic of language is that it makes sense even though it has no permanence.

If you want to move beyond Derrida and all the other immanentists, then start thinking about what a metaphysics after immanentism could look like. Now that we know that language doesn't transcendentally signify essence in any OBVIOUS way, what kinds of questions can we ask about how language DOES work? What anchors our ability to understand meaning in the absence of onto-theology? What makes language and understanding possible, Being possible, for real, evolved organisms, really existing and embedded in a material world? What would a true mystical neo-Platonism look like after being stripped of its onto-theological naivete?

Anonymous Fri Mar 9 10:46:10 2018 No.10818155

>>10818132
If we apprehend a demand of this kind in its broader context, and view it as it appears at the stage which self-conscious Spirit has presently reached, it is clear that Spirit has now got beyond the substantial life it formerly led in the element of thought, that it is beyond the immediacy of faith, beyond the satisfaction and security of the certainty that consciousness then had, of its reconciliation with the essential being, and of that being's universal presence both within and without. It has not only gone beyond all this into the other extreme of an insubstantial reflection of itself into itself, but beyond that too. Spirit has
not oply lost its essential life; it is also conscious of this loss, and of the finitude that is its own content. Turning away from the empty husks, and confessing that it lies in wickedness, it reviles itself for so doing, and now demands from philosophy, not so much knowledge of what it is, as the recovery through its agency of that lost sense of solid .and substantial being.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 9 10:51:35 2018 No.10818172 >>10818127 This >>10818146 There already are some elaborations, the notion of 'imposible-necesario' of Núñez, and some other approaches to understand the 'spectral existence' of the kantian noumenon.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 9 10:54:39 2018 No.10818182 >>10818127 >Peirce goes very far in the direction of the deconstruction of the transcendental signified. Which at one time or another would place a reasurring end from the reference of sign to sign. What did derrida mean by this?

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 9 10:56:58 2018 No.10818192 >>10818182 Hard to tell without any context.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 9 10:59:08 2018 No.10818197 File: 57 KB, 600x600, 1508729826113.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>10818192 >Hard to tell without any context

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 9 11:04:49 2018 No.10818219 >>10818197 great memes bro

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 9 11:07:13 2018 No.10818234 >>10818219 Thanks. I felt like a bad boy for posting them, they're like junk food. Also btw memes aren't real, the very conception of a "meme" is that of an impossible degenerate sign.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 9 11:09:22 2018 No.10818247 >>10818234 wow tell me more

Anonymous Fri Mar 9 11:13:08 2018 No.10818264

>>10818127
Have you actually read him? A fraction of what he writes has substance, and even that is piddling. For most of the time, he's pettily rambling over very inane issues. He is an excellent example of the word sophomoric.

>it's impossible to know the meaning of words
But it is not only possible, but unavoidable to have an interpretation of them, which means that communication does not need to cease at all, which is more than likely what he was hoping for.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 9 11:14:58 2018 No.10818272 >>10818264 What have you read by him to reach such conclusions?

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 9 11:16:47 2018 No.10818282 >>10818127 Anyone who critiques Heidegger would disprove Derrida.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 9 11:18:36 2018 No.10818292 >>10818282 Any good critique on Heidegger, then?

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 9 11:25:59 2018 No.10818322 >>10818127 Why even try to discuss the guy when you've obviously never read him.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 9 11:28:27 2018 No.10818336 >>10818272 The Truth in Painting and Spurs: Nietzsche's Styles

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 9 11:28:55 2018 No.10818338 >>10818292 I've never seems someone on /lit/ offer a critique of Heidegger Everyone just sucks his dick, same with Hegel

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 9 11:30:09 2018 No.10818342 >>10818338 I was asking for bibliography, though, not a personal commentary from anon.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 9 11:42:34 2018 No.10818398 >>10818336 What was the fraction you thought had substance?

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 9 11:44:43 2018 No.10818409 >>10818398 I didn't bother taking notes to tell you what pages to look on.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 9 11:45:28 2018 No.10818412 >>10818338 Here's a critique: phenomenological priority does not imply ontological priority.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 9 11:47:41 2018 No.10818421 >>10818409 What I meant is what of it do you remember thinking: this is not utter shit?

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 9 11:48:40 2018 No.10818424 >>10818412 You could say that, but that just seems obvious. Heidegger surely didn't just accept that idea prima facie.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 9 11:51:44 2018 No.10818432 >>10818421 It is all shit, but from his rambling he does eventually try to make his arguments, the "substance."

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 9 11:52:13 2018 No.10818436 >>10818338 No one does except some Christian, mostly Catholic, thinkers.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 9 12:00:12 2018 No.10818462 >>10818432 >he didn't read it

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 9 12:05:04 2018 No.10818480 >>10818462 >everyone must end at the same conclusion of what they have read Nice one, but unfortunately I did read those two, and they are a fucking horrid slog to get through. I'm not cruel enough to recommend them to anyone.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 9 12:11:39 2018 No.10818499 >>10818480 Let's pretend. How would you compare the two?

Anonymous Fri Mar 9 12:19:44 2018 No.10818526

>>10818499
They're different books on different subjects, but in both he ultimately discusses linguistics and other people more than the subjects themselves. He revealed in both that he cared little about the subjects themselves, preferring to discuss, for example, what the word "painting" means and what Nietzsche's umbrella note means, and touching on what others have said they have meant. Almost nothing said at all about the subjects themselves but on external discourse regarding very pedantic aspects of them. To me, there is no value in this whatsoever, it's sophomoric content.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 9 12:25:01 2018 No.10818546 >>10818526 t. pseud shill

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 9 12:47:29 2018 No.10818633 File: 1.46 MB, 446x469, 1513203196084.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>10818546 What do you think I'm shilling?

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 9 12:49:49 2018 No.10818639 >>10818633 memes

Anonymous Fri Mar 9 13:03:26 2018 No.10818697

>>10818436
Strange. Most Catholic thinkers and writers I've encountered think very highly of Heidegger. He is a paradox, simultaneously married to Thomistic cosmology while rejecting its ontological necessity. Heidegger was very seriously considering going into the priesthood at one point and it's clear that his thinking was very much shaped by the scholastics.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 9 14:20:50 2018 No.10818970 >>10818127 >So did Derrida pretty much prove that it's impossible to know the meaning of words or what. Well if he really did that then you would also never know. Also Ä**SMJTGFasoiõ 'üöl80o92wemllgfäõqasömvf akimnölamstõäüõ' ä'ass''gh@5tg??

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 9 14:21:57 2018 No.10818974 >>10818970 hahah ahahah hahah nice meme!!

Anonymous Fri Mar 9 14:22:54 2018 No.10818978

>>10818127
>>10818970
Hehe also if someone presents themselves as proven something like that he deserves to get beaten over and over again and over his every protestation it should be said : "what I did not quite catch you? Did you say you really really want more beatings?"

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 9 14:23:55 2018 No.10818983 >>10818974 What's the meme here? Is it the logical reasoning or the joke anon made afterwards?

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 9 14:25:52 2018 No.10818991 >>10818983 The joke, of course. The logical reasoning didn't escape from Derrida, his philosophy is by definition self defeating.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 9 14:27:12 2018 No.10818998 >>10818991 by design, I should've said. Sorry, my English is trash.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 9 14:27:20 2018 No.10818999 >>10818991 >his philosophy is by definition self defeating please direct us toward said definiton

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 9 14:28:25 2018 No.10819003 >>10818998 Why would he set out to elaborate a self defeating philosophy?

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 9 14:29:08 2018 No.10819007 >>10818132 suck a fat hog

Anonymous Fri Mar 9 15:13:34 2018 No.10819182

>>10818132
Jesus fucking christ. I fully understand that this is a troll, but jesus christ. This is the worst comment i've ver read, and if the person writing this was serious, the person would be the person with the most shitty mind possible. Like, just fucking kill all these people, because even though i dont belive this comment in particualr is sincere, there are people in the world that hold these views, and i've spoken to them, which probably is the reson im so revolted, but still, fucking christ.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 9 15:44:34 2018 No.10819323 >>10818146 Thread ended here.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 9 15:52:29 2018 No.10819346 >>10819182 I dont think you understand

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 9 16:11:15 2018 No.10819409 >>10818155 TL;DR yes

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 9 16:19:56 2018 No.10819443 >>10818146 >If you want to move beyond Derrida and all the other immanentists, then start thinking about what a metaphysics after immanentism could look like. >metaphysics No. Nietzsche is the way to go, metaphysics after him is a mistake.

Anonymous Fri Mar 9 16:20:18 2018 No.10819444

>>10818127
No, Derrida very much relies on meaning of words to make his point, in a general communicative way, and to look at writing in a more considered way, with regards to etymology and genealogy and the like. He proves that words -- more specifically the written word -- is not just a substitute for the spoken word from which we infer intention and meaning and that it can be read as its own production; and related he proves that the spoken word is not a pure expression of thought or truth, even though the proximity of the speaker hearing himself speak gives the illusion of such.

The basis of our literature and codified laws is the metaphysical belief that speech (and with it the chain of other properties interior/present/intelligible/signified etc.) is a kind of elliptical shortcut to truth as situated in the 'onto-theological' (a Heideggerean term) character of Western thought, and that the derivative or opposite (writing/exterior/absent/sensible/signifier) are inadequate substitutes that lend themselves to corruption. The economy of this system gives us what things 'mean' by the relation of signifier to signified, and Derrida can't do without this, but what he was doing involved reading the text in a way where written words could also 'mean' something other than the pure intention of the author all without disrupting that economy that holds the text together.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 9 16:49:51 2018 No.10819575 File: 89 KB, 226x219, 1408560460993.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >différance

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 9 16:58:34 2018 No.10819603 >>10819575 What about it?

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 9 17:04:58 2018 No.10819632 >>10818146 >There is no magical essence of a word standing outside it and making it make sense. This kills the Socrates.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 9 20:50:06 2018 No.10820483 >>10819182 >I fully understand that this is a troll >still gets mad lmaoing @ ur life, pseudboi

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 9 20:55:06 2018 No.10820502 >>10818146 I don't see how you can even have neo-platonism without transcendental metaphysics and essences. you might as well abandon it

Anonymous Fri Mar 9 21:11:07 2018 No.10820538

>>10818127
no shit words have no meaning, they're vectors. You have to assume the person you're talking to is coming from a similar place as you so you can guide them to the meaning. A road has no predefined destination but you can give someone directions.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 9 21:14:36 2018 No.10820548 >>10820538 This. I also find it funny that people think this is a revelation / Derrida was being original with this when the idea already bloomed in Nietzsche, and even before him.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 10 07:31:14 2018 No.10821976 >>10818697 Um, his philosophy is a wholesale rejection of Catholicism and a move towards a radical Lutheranism and Calvinism. Catholics engage with Heidegger because they have no other choice.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 10 07:36:20 2018 No.10821982 >>10820548 Well, Derrida has done nothing other than to translate Heidegger into french. And Heidegger did nothing other than to rip-off Nietzsche while adding that will to power is still metaphysics.

Anonymous Sat Mar 10 08:02:39 2018 No.10822010 [SPOILER]

File: 317 KB, 1080x1076, 1520686959615.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>10818127
To understand what you're trying to you have to understand that Derrida was a jew and applying an ethnic/talmudic method of thinking to attack or break down western philosophical notions. Western man uses philosophy to seek meaning; jew uses philosophy to destroy it or promote the notion that there is none. I know it sounds strange to good-natured whites but jews are an anti-people, they are stuck in destroy mode, so whites must approach their ideas and cultural machinations as an attack or attempt to reverse our own, because that's what they are doing.

Anonymous Sat Mar 10 08:10:08 2018 No.10822024

>>10820548
Jews are a semitic people. The last thing semites are known for are producing creative or original ideas. What they are known for however is dishonesty and repackaging the ideas of others then promoting such things to others with malicious intent. That's more or less the history of Christianity as well, it's an immemorial phenomenon/tribal behavior.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 10 08:17:18 2018 No.10822046 >>10822010 This. Worth reading CoC for the part on Derrida alone.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 10 08:27:08 2018 No.10822071 >>10822024 >>10822010 Heidegger invented deconstruction though.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 10 08:31:49 2018 No.10822088 >>10822024 i just read > Jews are a semiotic people lol it is also true, isn't it?

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 10 08:38:41 2018 No.10822109 >>10822010 >>10822024 >>10822046 go to bed Kevin

Anonymous Sat Mar 10 08:47:04 2018 No.10822138

>>10822071
This was addressed here: >>10822024
Jews are not original thinkers. What they do is in a malevolent fashion pick from others and twist their ideas in ways that are bad for the host group and good for jews, then they promote them tribally by doing things like, say, institutionalizing those nihilistic, iconoclastic ideas in academia. That was the case with Derrida and Marxism generally. But something like deconstruction also was not approached by Heidegger with bad intentions, which is not true for the jews who adopted and reformatted it.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 10 08:48:23 2018 No.10822140 >>10822138 >>10822109

Anonymous Sat Mar 10 08:50:29 2018 No.10822146

>>10818127
>it's impossible to know the meaning of words or what
no he simply showed that often, especially in philosophy, words that are used mostly out of laziness or carelessness end up having more meaning than the author might have thought, and that this surplus meaning recurs systematically through the text

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 10 08:51:31 2018 No.10822150 >>10819443 this is such a stupid person's post.

Anonymous Sat Mar 10 08:53:31 2018 No.10822159

>>10818146
>What would a true mystical neo-Platonism look like after being stripped of its onto-theological naivete?
you'd have to find someway of figuring the transcendental within a form of historical materialism, not necessarily the marxist oriented toward class and contradiction. but derrida already provides this in the metaphysics of writing, trace, iterability, etc. check out martin hagglund

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 10 09:46:20 2018 No.10822308 >>10822138 >Jews are not original thinkers. Define "original thinker"

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 10 10:12:57 2018 No.10822384 >>10820548 Derrida thinks words do have meaning though as he says otherwise translation is impossible. People think 'this is a revelation' because they haven't read Derrida.

Anonymous Sat Mar 10 10:19:28 2018 No.10822411

>>10822308
Jews score low on spatial IQ tests, which are proxies for creativity, which is a proxy for outside the box type thinking, which informs the range of original thought and ideas. Jewish culture promotes consensus and jews are extremely similar to each other due to inbreeding so "original thought" or creative endeavors are and have always been largely absent from their culture.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 10 10:38:12 2018 No.10822473 >>10818412 lol this could be a critique of both the big H's

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 10 10:40:22 2018 No.10822483 >>10818338 >lol pure being and nothing are the same thing >I can't believe nobody has thought of this before! Why do "people" like Hegel again?

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 10 12:00:45 2018 No.10822702 >>10822411 Okay, so define "original thinker"

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 10 12:12:34 2018 No.10822740 >>10822702 Someone who fits at the higher end within the framework you were provided.

Anonymous Sat Mar 10 12:15:38 2018 No.10822749

>>10822411
>ewish culture promotes consensus
Not really true. They bicker endlessly about their Talmud or their modern secular versions of Talmudic discourse

this whole thing about spatial IQ reads like a massive we wuzz to me. Jews are highly overrepresented in physics and math.

It's funny how WNs will trot out IQ scores as proof of race differences but then try to downplay the Asian and Jewish scores. You either accept the metric or you don't, and anybody who isn't biased sees exactly what is going on.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 10 12:29:10 2018 No.10822792 >>10819182 welcome to the borderline of chaos and order, friendo

Anonymous Sat Mar 10 12:36:02 2018 No.10822822

>>10822749
It's very true and the reason why jewish derived or promoted ideologies put people into believer/heretic camps, be it Christianity, communism, or liberalism: their community isn't concerned with nuance but forcing consensus. Jews are also over-represented more in the theoretical side of a field like physics. And WNs widely acknowledge Asian and jewish IQ scores even when they don't understand the results are based around rote memorization, which is why both groups are under-represented in terms of their actual innovations in fields of science and technology, of which whites are responsible for around 97% of the total. So everything in your post was wrong. Make more of an effort to become informed about the subjects you attempt to speak on in the future so you don't waste people's time correcting you.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 10 12:54:55 2018 No.10822871 >>10822010 Why do westerners need to seek meaning?

Anonymous Sat Mar 10 13:13:29 2018 No.10822944

>>10822871
It's part of the European spirit, what some refer to as the "Faustian spirit" of white people. This desire to know and understand the world is what spurs artistic creativity, innovative striving, and an inclination to explore the world and beyond, and is as prevalent in whites as it is lacking in non-whites.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 10 13:27:51 2018 No.10822990 >>10822944 This desire to seek meaning is a weakness because it implies there's some magical objectivity to be reached, and then when some come along and say 'sorry folks' they are frustrated.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 10 13:49:37 2018 No.10823066 >>10822990 Rather unproductive and unsophisticated way of looking at things, don't you think?

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 10 14:03:50 2018 No.10823110 >>10823066 Well a lot of people like to cling onto concepts and think there are such things as magical words and symbols and whatnot. But it's just sense-data and thoughts that want to grasp onto whatever.

Anonymous Sat Mar 10 14:08:17 2018 No.10823129

>>10823110
basically this. It's obvious when you think of schizophrenis and bipolar people- for them the meaning is totally out of lign with reality, the subjective feeling of meaning is just a brain pattern, and not some connection with anything outside the person.

For normal people it's the same thing except that the feeling of meaning is correlated with stuff in the real world- love, having kids, art, etc. Ultimately though it's no different, it's just statistically accurate enough for the person to function well enough to reproduce

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 10 14:20:15 2018 No.10823180 >>10822822 >It's very true and the reason why jewish derived or promoted ideologies put people into believer/heretic camps >Everything good in white societies is because of Europeans >Everything bad in white societies is because of the Jews

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 10 14:25:23 2018 No.10823197 >>10823129 >correlated now we know you don’t know what you’re talking about >meaning isn’t directly connected with the outside world wowzer then why do signs look like objects?

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 10 14:26:37 2018 No.10823205 >>10822749 >>this whole thing about spatial IQ reads like a massive we wuzz to me It is.

Anonymous Sat Mar 10 14:32:28 2018 No.10823229

>>10822822
>dualist thinking is Jewish
no its Iranian and Aryan kill yourself you fucking hack
>Jews are underrepresented in creativity
no they’re overrepresented massively, they’ve created more inventions, theorems, financial instruments, books than all of the hispanics and blacks combined so this is bullshit
>asians aren’t creative
the japanese patent more new tech than anyone else, the chinese are the cutting edge of physics and computer science, no one else is as advanced as they are in biotech and ai research
>whites are responsible for 97%
wow weird how Jews have all those fields and nobel prizes and asians are publishing signifianctly more papers than whites, it must be white genocide tho
>become informed about lying little cowards

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 10 14:33:02 2018 No.10823233 >>10818999 You can deconstruct the idea of deconstruction. It's more of an intended feature than a problem, but anon's probably referring to that.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 10 14:37:27 2018 No.10823248 >>10823233 Deconstruction isn't a defeating though so probably not -- he's just talking out his ass.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 10 14:37:29 2018 No.10823249 File: 235 KB, 1148x408, snippity snap.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>10821976 Heidegger was buried a catholic desu.

Anonymous Sat Mar 10 14:40:52 2018 No.10823269

>>10823229
It's obvious you're a kike, which is also why your fabrications are so transparent. Dualistic thinking was not what was being described.
>than all of the hispanics and blacks combined
That's not impressive.

>asians aren’t creative
They aren't, and much of their technology has been copied from white countries.

>Jews have
Benefitted enormously from their nepotistic behavior in white countries, where others are assumed to be acting honestly and in good faith, and have used our naivete to inflate their achievements.

Now get off this board, jew.

Anonymous Sat Mar 10 14:43:38 2018 No.10823287

>>10823269
>i wasn’t talking about dualism but i was, but not when i talk to you
lol at you
>its not impressive
they’re 2% of the global population
>asians aren’t publishing more papers than whites
>they stole all of that groundbreaking AI and biotech research
>jews stole the ability to win fields medals for groundbreaking work and nobels for groundbreaking work
>leave my board so i can mutter in the corner with the other unclean souls in peace

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 10 14:46:30 2018 No.10823291 >>10823287 >2% of the global population N-no way there are that many of them.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 10 14:48:50 2018 No.10823296 >>10823197 yeah correlated as in the meaning feeling happens usually when something important actually does happens. There is a correlation between the feeling and between actual important events.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 10 14:50:16 2018 No.10823301 >>10823291 you’re right, they’re .2% of the global population which would make outperforming 2/3 of it extremely impressive.

Anonymous Sat Mar 10 14:53:21 2018 No.10823314

>>10823287
You're a jew who is presenting lies and half-truths. This is a part of your nature. Is it worth my time to argue with a jew who has already proven himself to be a liar about why quantity of published papers in China is not a substitute for quality? You probably know this because everyone knows this, but you're a kike so honesty isn't important to you.

Anonymous Sat Mar 10 14:56:24 2018 No.10823331

>>10823314
lol go home white man you’re finished, exhausted spirit, slimy soul
>>10823301
ignored what i said: WHY DO THE SIGNS LOOK LIKE THE OBJECTS? IF THERE IS NO APPERCEPTION OF THINGS AS THEY ARE THEN WHERE DO THE SIGNS ARISE FROM AND WHY DO THEY RESEMBLE THE OBJECTS GENERATING THEM? OR IS IT A COINCIDENCE THEY LOOK LIKE THEM

Anonymous Sat Mar 10 14:56:53 2018 No.10823336

>>10823301
People should read Charles Murray's book Human Accomplishment. It explains how jewish scientific and technological contributions were literally nonexistent prior to the 1800s. When they were allowed to infest our societies afterwards was when they suddenly became amazing innovators, which often involved stealing from people and giving each other awards. Jews are dishonest people like the jewish poster itt. Thankfully this nature of theirs is becoming more transparent to others.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 10 14:58:14 2018 No.10823340 File: 19 KB, 553x312, DXEVliIWkAEBoBh.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>10823336

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 10 15:00:52 2018 No.10823353 >>10818127 >So did Derrida pretty much prove Stopped reading there

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 10 15:02:09 2018 No.10823362 >>10818146 What's hilarious is that Schopenhauer already answered all this before anyone made it a question

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 10 15:03:50 2018 No.10823370 >>10823340 That's not the book I was talking about (Human Accomplishment).

Anonymous Sat Mar 10 15:04:27 2018 No.10823375

>>10818146
The answers to this are so fucking obvious though, words are just nodes that link to arrays of sense perception and relations between them.

A word doesn't mean anything objectively but most people's version of a word corresponds to a set of sense perceptions similar enough that language is useful

Anonymous Sat Mar 10 15:06:49 2018 No.10823388

>>10823336
>Jews are emancipated in the 1800’s and allowed to assimilate
>they assimilate
>they metriculate into unis they were absolutely not allowed to attend
>they take to science like fish in water
>they start producing far more than any other group
>they’re blamed for stealing it by people who can’t back anything up but cry about Hilbert and Einstein without understanding why Einstein got a Nobel Prize in the first place because they aren’t physicists or inventors and are not interested in science or engineering at all beyond bragging or a pay check
you should all be hung, drained of your blood and then burned in front of every major city on a mass pyre. every single white rat who has alleged Jews steal their ideas, their inventions and their theorems from whytes needs to be killed. this basically unacceptable

Anonymous Sat Mar 10 15:17:43 2018 No.10823412
File: 26 KB, 892x393, 31dd7d8fabe3bde28d6a0825175ad2bc4e8e1d9e85fca2dec82434fc0fbc97b8.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>10823388
Read this post and remember that jews are sick people. This jew is reacting with so much hostility because I have triggered his "protect the tribe" instinct that thousands of years of inbreeding has instilled in him (along with many mental and genetic diseases per the image).

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 10 15:25:44 2018 No.10823442 >>10818127 Do you really think it's impossible to know the meaning of words? I wonder how you're reading this sentence, if so.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 10 15:49:14 2018 No.10823559 >>10819444 >Signified is the opposite of signifier I want to choke whoever posited this.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 10 16:11:44 2018 No.10823650 File: 87 KB, 1280x720, 1280x720-kzu.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>10823559 >Seinfeld is the opposite of signifier what did he mean by this?

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 10 16:12:56 2018 No.10823656 >>10823650 >Sigmundfreud is the opposite of signifer What could this madman have intended

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 10 16:14:44 2018 No.10823662 >>10823442 I can't read

Advanced search
Text to find
Subject [?]Search by post subject. Leave empty for any.
Username [?]Search for user name. Leave empty for any user name.
Tripcode [?]Search for tripcode. Leave empty for any.
Email [?]Search by email. Leave empty for any.
Filename [?]Search by image filename. Leave empty for any.
From Date [?]Enter what date to start searching from. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
To Date [?]Enter what date to start searching until. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
Image hash
Search in	All Posts OPs Only
Deleted posts	Show all posts Show only deleted posts Only show non-deleted posts
Internal posts	Show all posts Show only internal posts Show only archived posts
Order	New posts first Old posts first
Capcode	All Posts Only by Users Only by Mods Only by Admins Only by Developers
Results	Posts Threads
Action	[ Simple ]

/lit/ - Literature