/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.11157678]

Is analytical philosophy pure unadulterated autism?

[Anonymous No.11157699]

>>11157678
Mostly, yes.
Continental Philosophy is mostly poetry tho, so you really just should avoid 20th century philosophy.

[Anonymous No.11157702]

Something like that

[Anonymous No.11157717]

This is why I don't read anything written in my life.

[Anonymous No.11157755]

>>11157678
Which page is that?

[Anonymous No.11157785]

>>11157678
Do you think that pic qualifies as analytical philosophy?

[Anonymous No.11157798]

>>11157755

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/death/

The page on DEATH!!!!

[Anonymous No.11157825]

>>11157798
lmao, Anglos were a mistake.

[Anonymous No.11157831]

>>11157678
Analyti philosophy is just a return to the original autism of the greeks

[Anonymous No.11157862]

>>11157702

My version:

Analytic philosophy: People describing increasingly unimportant things in increasingly precise language.

Continental: People describing increasingly grand and bullshitty concepts in increasingly vague language.

[Anonymous No.11157896]

>>11157825

>Be on death bed
>"Do not worry mother."
>"I accumulated (9x5+10y3)3 pleasure points in this life."

[Anonymous No.11157905]

Is Continental Philosophy=Epistemology, Metaphysics etc.

and Analytical something like Utilitarian rationalism?

[Anonymous No.11157923]

>>11157896
Kek

[Anonymous No.11157939]

>>11157678
>coffee will not cause me to endure any evils

this lad is not up to date on current sleep science

[Anonymous No.11157946]

>>11157798
Yeah I've seen this page before, its an embarrassment, moles on tenure so fundamentally disconnected from reality. Sad!

[Anonymous No.11157950]

>>11157678
>>11157702
>>11157862
Analytic philosophy is autism spectrum, continental philosophy is schizoid spectrum.

[Anonymous No.11157972]

>>11157905
Not at all, if anything it's the opposite and it's such a shame that this misconception is so popular. If you want grand metaphysical and epistemological debates, you're going to find them in 20th-century analytic philosophy, not the oftentimes anti-metaphysical continentals who do everything they can to destroy it.

[Anonymous No.11158271]

>>11157825
t. Heretic

[Anonymous No.11158288]

>>11157896
>tfw your dog will always have the family record
Embarrassing desu

[Anonymous No.11158332]

>>11157798
Philosophy departments all over the world are being replaced by this?

[Anonymous No.11158357]

>>11157950
Continentals are clearly superiour then

[Anonymous No.11158368]

>>11157678
Philosophy is going nowhere until people start to take Rorty seriously.

[Anonymous No.11158373]

Dickens btfo of analytics even before hey were a thing
>Now, what I want is, Facts. Teach these boys and girls nothing but Facts. Facts alone are wanted in life. Plant nothing else, and root out everything else. You can only form the minds of reasoning animals upon Facts: nothing else will ever be of any service to them. This is the principle on which I bring up my own children, and this is the principle on which I bring up these children. Stick to Facts, sir!

[Anonymous No.11158378]

Honestly looks like Economics. Does this person not realize that economics actually tackles the problem of 'utility' across time periods or is he just not very well read?

This idea is where investment and interest come from, obviously. I suppose he is connecting it with existentialism?

Utility of money, for me, is just so interesting. It lets us tap into the inner psychology of individuals, but if you really analyze it you end up finding out that the partial derivative of a price change in terms of the function of money (as composed of other goods) is simply never zero, like some economists want to believe. The relation of money bears a harder impact on certain goods more than others, and it's all personal as well, to a measurable degree as well of course.

Once we've entered the matrix, psychology becomes measurable thanks to money ;). That's one benefit of it.

[Anonymous No.11158381]

>>11158368
Tell me more Rortyposter!

[Anonymous No.11158386]

>>11157678
>Death article

>Some school of thought called comparativism

Im not sure this is analytic

[Anonymous No.11158393]

>>11158381
Stolen

[Anonymous No.11158394]

>>11158368
>Philosophy is going nowhere until people start to ragequit philosophy

[Anonymous No.11158405]

>>11158394
>autistic linguistic arguments
>philosophy

[Anonymous No.11158447]

>>11158386

It's certainly not Continental.

[Anonymous No.11158453]

Normal, suffering human being struggling with the senselessness of death:

>Today or tomorrow sickness and death will come (they had come already) to those I love or to me; nothing will remain but stench and worms. Sooner or later my affairs, whatever they may be, will be forgotten, and I shall not exist. Then why go on making any effort?... How can man fail to see this? And how go on living? That is what is surprising! One can only live while one is intoxicated with life; as soon as one is sober it is impossible not to see that it is all a mere fraud and a stupid fraud! That is precisely what it is: there is nothing either amusing or witty about it, it is simply cruel and stupid.

"""""""""""""""""Superior""""""""""""""" anglophone philosophy on death:

>From the causal account, together with some plausible assumptions, it follows that a post-mortem event, such as the burning of one’s corpse, cannot affect us after we are dead, since, by (a), to be affected is to be affected causally, but, by (b), nonexistent people cannot be causally affected by any event. It also follows that the state of being dead cannot affect us while we are dead. Here we are assuming that people cease to exist when they die (the termination thesis). From the causal account it also follows that neither being dead, nor any events that follow, can affect us while we are alive, given the ban on backwards causation:

[Anonymous No.11158509]

>>11157972
They don't want to destroy it. Nietzsche already did but the continentals don't live in denial like the retarded anglos and try to deal with the void left by metaphysics.

[Anonymous No.11158711]

>>11158453
I've read Luper's book on death and much of his work. I think he'd agree with your first quote. He's more interested in defending our ordinary inuitions about death--that it is awful and senseless for a healthy person. The highly technical writing is a byproduct of obsession with symbolic logic.

There are many "baby's first philosophy" tier arguments regarding death. Chief among them
>muh pre-birth unbeing wasn't harmful, so muh post-death unbeing isn't harmful
And
>Doctors should do no harm. Assisting the death of a terminally ill patient in constant agony is a harm. Hence doctors can't practice assisted suicide.

There are people in important policy positions who breathlessly accept 'babys first philosophy' arguments when making policy choices. For instance, some European countries have insanely lax policy towards assisted suicide that fails to adequately weight the fact that death is a great harm to people who *could* have good reasons to live(mentally ill people). Most states in the USA have highly restrictive laws about assisted suicide, laws that cause great harm to terminally ill patients. Luper roughly says that the harmfulness of death is context dependent, but that the only times when death is NOT a harm is when life has become irreparably tragic. The SEP article doesn't necessarily demonstratr his personal views.

[Anonymous No.11158746]

>>11157678
Wtf is this shit???

Socrates is turning in his grave...

[Anonymous No.11158761]

>>11158711
I know what he's going for and I know what he's trying to say but when I want to read about death and philosophy I don't give a shit about policy decisions and laws, I want to read about fuckin' death and what the fuck it means and what the fuck we gonna do

[Anonymous No.11158769]

>>11157678
most philosophy from the enlightenment onward is pure autism

[Anonymous No.11158773]

>>11157950
holy shit this

[Anonymous No.11158855]

>>11157862
I think this characterization is correct. Analytic philosophy's obsession with precision condemns it to petty things. On the other hand, continental philosophy's obsession with grand things condemns it to obscurity. I wish most philosophers would adopt a more reasonable middle ground.

[Anonymous No.11158937]

>>11158509
It seems to me that Nietzsche's understanding of metaphysics is bound to be different from someone like Sellars, Strawson, or James Ladyman. What is it that's stopping me from inquiring into the ontology of our best physical theories, for example (something that physicists and philosophers alike would consider within the purview of metaphysics)?

Critiques of metaphysics (or ontotheology) seem incomplete to me, because metaphysics itself encompasses such a wide range of questions as to be almost impossible to escape. It will always exist and it will always slip past those who try to censure it, analytic and continental alike

[Anonymous No.11158998]

I hate philosophy, am I retarded?

[Anonymous No.11159014]

>>11158394
fucking kek

[Anonymous No.11159017]

>>11158381
>You see Morty, language does not resemble reality anymore than an anteater's snout resembles an ant tunnel.

[Anonymous No.11159024]

>>11158998
Probably, or you are just confused

[Anonymous No.11159033]

>>11157678
>tfw everyone hates analytic philosophy because it's actually rigorous and you actually have to have your shit together to participate in it

[Anonymous No.11159091]

>like analytical philosophy
>but also enjoy continental philosophy
Why can't we just get along?

[Anonymous No.11159380]

>mfw analytical philosophy solves he problem of human happiness first

[Anonymous No.11159410]

>>11158378
>Honestly looks like Economics. Does this person not realize that economics actually tackles the problem of 'utility' across time periods or is he just not very well read?
That's more Game Theory desu. Calling Game Theory a part of Economics isn't the worst mistake you can make, but it still is one.

[Anonymous No.11159429]

>>11158332
have people been saying sep is replacing philosophy departments