Hey /lit/. I'm a philosophy noob. So far the main things that seem to interest me are Wittgenstein's later work on language and to a lesser extend stuff like Nietzsche and Aristotle. What similar stuff would you recommend for me based on this?

File: 2.94 MB, 353x480, 1286765412562.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Anonymous Sat Oct 30 21:49:12 2010 No.1247369 [Reply] [Original]

Hey /lit/.

I'm a philosophy noob. So far the main things that seem to interest me are Wittgenstein's later work on language and to a lesser extend stuff like Nietzsche and Aristotle.

What similar stuff would you recommend for me based on this?

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 30 21:50:12 2010 No.1247372 Plato is perfect. Read Plato.

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 30 21:51:12 2010 No.1247374 >>1247372 No, no no. I appreciate your suggestion but I cannot stand Plato. :/

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 30 21:53:12 2010 No.1247376 Ayn Rand

Deep&Edgy !pSkjEcB9sQ Sat Oct 30 21:55:12 2010 No.1247380
File: 10 KB, 200x307, what-does-it-all-mean-very-short-introduction-thomas-nagel-paperback-cover-art.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Hey /lit/.

I'm a physics noob. So far the main things that seem to interest me are String Theory and to a lesser extend stuff like Quantum Physics and Thermonuclear Dynamics.

What similar stuff would you recommend for me based on this?

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 30 21:59:12 2010 No.1247387 You might enjoy the continental tradition, Saussure, Lyotard, and some other stuff. Definitely Quine, Rorty and Davidson. You should really read Hume.

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 30 22:00:12 2010 No.1247391 >>1247380 Don't be retarded string theory isn't physics its metaphysics.

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 30 22:00:12 2010 No.1247393 >>1247387 I really appreciate it, I have been meaning to read Hume anyway. Those other guys seem interesting as well.

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 30 22:01:12 2010 No.1247394 On a side note, what does /lit/ think of Whitehead and Russell?

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 30 22:03:12 2010 No.1247395 >>1247394 Not a big fan honestly.

>>	Deep&Edgy !pSkjEcB9sQ Sat Oct 30 22:04:12 2010 No.1247396 File: 23 KB, 297x400, Godel_3..jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>1247394 "leave them to me"

Anonymous Sat Oct 30 22:05:12 2010 No.1247398

Wittgenstein is probably too advanced. Plus you don't want to get sucked into the Wittgenstein trap (fun, interesting, not someone to worship like many do though). Kant is both incredibly important for later pursuit of Continental philosophy and is incredibly interesting. I still don't fully understand what you're interested in though?

>>	Deep&Edgy !pSkjEcB9sQ Sat Oct 30 22:06:12 2010 No.1247399 oops ignore my sage.

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 30 22:06:12 2010 No.1247400 >>1247396 I laughed heartily. Absolutely perfect.

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 30 22:07:12 2010 No.1247401 >>1247398 I'd say Kant is pretty damn import in analytic philosophy, but I don't come up against him that much in the continental tradition.

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 30 22:07:12 2010 No.1247402 File: 19 KB, 480x360, 1285320618054.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>1247399

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 30 22:08:12 2010 No.1247406 >>1247398 >>1247401 Kant is also someone I have been meaning to read in the near future. Ive "heard some things" about his thoughts on ethics though.

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 30 22:10:12 2010 No.1247410 >>1247401 He is incredibly important in both. Hegel is out there far in the future when you're in for a very tough read as well.

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 30 22:11:12 2010 No.1247411 John Searle

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 30 22:13:12 2010 No.1247413 >>1247411 Oh god I hate Searle. You'll either love him or hate him.

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 30 22:13:12 2010 No.1247415 Philosophically, I am opposed to not knowing the sauce of OP's .gif

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 30 22:15:12 2010 No.1247420 File: 1.90 MB, 320x240, 1286766016967.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>1247415 :P

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 30 22:18:12 2010 No.1247423 Don't think you have to read everything; just read what appeals to you. If you get halfway into something by Hegel or Kant and don't feel like continuing, don't worry about it. What they have to say usually isn't worth the experience of reading them.

Deep&Edgy !pSkjEcB9sQ Sat Oct 30 22:18:12 2010 No.1247424

Okey meng first you reads the Hume, then you read Kant, then Hegel now if you want 2 be an analytic tightarse you should go for like Frege & Russell, maybe a bit of James then Witty, Ayer then the Quine, some Tarski,Popper, Kuhn-kun, and a bunch of guys after that that haven't really pushed the project forward in any meaningful way

OR you can be a real cool dude who gets all the chicks and read a little bit of Hegel after Kant, Schopeadope, some Nietzsche, Marx, Freud, Husserl, "lolNazi", the Frankfurters, a bunch of structuralist shit no-one cares about anymore, Sartrem Foucault, that stupid old fart Habermas, Rorty, Derrida and so on

and what's more you'll be a man my son

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 30 22:21:12 2010 No.1247435 >>1247423 Who would you consider "essential reading" though? Whose work can I not afford to pass up in your opinion?

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 30 22:21:12 2010 No.1247440 ProTip: Never, ever listen to Deep&Edgy's advice.

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 30 22:22:12 2010 No.1247442 >>1247424 Frege highly recommended. Everyone loves his writing.

>>	Deep&Edgy !pSkjEcB9sQ Sat Oct 30 22:22:12 2010 No.1247444 bonus points if you be a pig disgusting ignorant westerner and ignore Confucius, kukai, the Tao, Dogen, the kyoto school etc

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 30 22:23:12 2010 No.1247445 File: 78 KB, 500x375, 1286366874553.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>1247424 you really are deep & edgy after all

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 30 22:24:12 2010 No.1247447 >>1247444 Just wondering Deep&Edgy, what do you focus on in school? Also are you in grad school or what

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 30 22:25:12 2010 No.1247448 >>1247440 I've been here for a few months so I'm aware of all the trolls. He's being somewhat amusing itt so I'm kind of humoring him.

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 30 22:27:12 2010 No.1247449 Baudrillard

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 30 22:28:12 2010 No.1247450 File: 13 KB, 209x168, trollface.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>1247435 Thomas Aquinas

>>	Deep&Edgy !pSkjEcB9sQ Sat Oct 30 22:29:12 2010 No.1247451 File: 12 KB, 436x435, heehee.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >are you in grad school or what if isabelle huppert could see me now >>1247449 oh shit yeah, this guy is pretty fuckin important as well

Anonymous Sat Oct 30 22:39:12 2010 No.1247464

>>1247451
>>1247449
Baudrillard, Lyotrad and Deleuze and Guattari (two authors writing together) are all fun reads but you have to take much of their theory in stride. Literary theory, in general, is to be held suspect, although nothing really has taken its place, but rather much of postmoderism has been assimilated into out thinking.

As far as philosophy and criticism go, I feel that the western world tends to have a proclivity towards whatever Eagleton happens to be saying at the moment. Lately he's dumped much of his marxism for a renewed interest in theology and organized religion, and to an extent, much of the world has followed suit.

But yeah, start with the German phenomenologists, as most have already recommend, and work your way up to posttheory.

I would say the classical and eastern schools should be read, but read separately. Heidegger will elaborate on this a bit.

Anonymous Sat Oct 30 22:43:12 2010 No.1247473

>>1247435

Hume.

Nietzsche, Kuhn, Kant(Prologomena to any Future metaphysics is a fairly short work by him that will give you an understanding of his project, the critques are something you may want to dive into after you have established a good deal of background) ,Quine, Spinoza.... I could put names up here all day but at some point you'll figure out what interests you and what doesn't and gravitate toward that. Doing all the "essential reading" is a lifetime project. read what you enjoy.

philosophy grad student here.

Anonymous Sat Oct 30 22:45:12 2010 No.1247476

Although he is nothing like Wittgenstein I would suggest reading JP Sartre because to the philosophy new comer Sartre can serve as enticement to develop a certain way of reading texts...I'm being a little nebulous I know but reading Sartre piqued my interest in philosophy and familiarized me with terminology that has always been essential when reading other philosophy.

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 30 22:45:12 2010 No.1247478 Kierkegaard

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 30 22:47:12 2010 No.1247479 >>1247435 Marcus Aurelius, Meister Eckhart, Spengler, Cioran.

Anonymous Sat Oct 30 22:53:12 2010 No.1247491

Some of you internet smart guys need to realize that op referred to himself as a noob and stop senselessly name dropping--we get it, you've got a working library card but Op needs entry level. I would suggest reading one of the many anthologies or introductory books available and if op is from the us he should definitely read some Thoreau just sayin

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 30 22:57:12 2010 No.1247496 >>1247491 He asked for what we considered essential. A lot of what's considered classic can, in my opinion, be passed up.

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 30 23:07:12 2010 No.1247514 >>1247491 I plan on thoroughly establishing a solid foundation. First through intro then intermediate texts. I wanted to know what /lit/ approved of for a bit of perspective is all.

Anonymous Sat Oct 30 23:10:12 2010 No.1247519

>>1247449
I've been reading some Baudrillard lately. I just finished his essays on the Gulf War. What I find really interesting about Baudrillard, being a postmodernist thinker, is that his own theory ends up falling susceptible to itself -- the whole hyperreality business.

The critic Christopher Norris gave Baudrillard much flak for writing the essays on the Gulf War. Norris, as many other critics, read Baudrillard's essays as literal interpretations of the reality of the war -- this is something that I've never been able to grasp, how someone as brilliant as Norris could make such a profound error in thinking. Anyhow, like his theory of hyperreality, Baudrillard's theory goes through a sort of hyperrealiaztion, one in which Norris and the public perpetuate their understanding of Baudrillard as opposed to what he actually wrote, the vanishing reality of his theory.

Baudrillard wanted to make known the fact that the public's reality of the Gulf War consisted of, for example, smart weapons, but the vanishing reality of the matter is that the weapons used were anything but smart. With the help of technology, our understanding of concepts and images becomes tailored and edited. What was once a chair now becomes a edited image of a chair.

Postmodernism gobbledygook aside, I find Baudrillard's contributions intriguing and sincere.

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 30 23:21:12 2010 No.1247537 >Literary theory, in general, is to be held suspect[.] That fucker Sokal ruined the fun for all of us.

Anonymous Sat Oct 30 23:26:12 2010 No.1247554

>>1247537
Sokal definitely helped, but the catalyst was unarguably the de Man incident, or rather Derrida's sixty page defense of the de Man incident.

This is when the literary theory movement became questionable.

Even Derrida sided with morality before his death.

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 30 23:28:12 2010 No.1247559 >>1247554 I've heard from some of my professors that Derrida was actually a very charming man in person, especially in his later years. When reading his work you cannot help but picture a crazed Heidegger behind the text. Apparently he smiled a lot.

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 30 23:33:12 2010 No.1247569 Are there any fellow moral nihilists on /lit? :/

Anonymous Sat Oct 30 23:33:12 2010 No.1247570

>>1247554
Have you ever actually read Derrida's response to the incident? The first 20 pages he asks if it is at all possible to "respond" and what such a "response" to anything would contain. Jesus. He doesn't even get to the antisemitism until around the fortieth page,when predictably, morality is obfuscated by rotary language and high brow mathematical terms gone wacky.

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 30 23:34:12 2010 No.1247571 >high brow mathematical terms gone wacky. Grrr. That nigger Sokal. I want recursion to mean what I want it to mean!

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 30 23:35:12 2010 No.1247574 >>1247569 Yep.

>>	Deep&Edgy !pSkjEcB9sQ Sat Oct 30 23:36:12 2010 No.1247575 >>1247569 >moral nihilism geez if you're going to go down that road at least have the decency to do it right i.e. non-cognitivism

Anonymous Sat Oct 30 23:39:12 2010 No.1247581

>>1247571
"Transgressing the Boundaries: Towards a Transformative Hermeneutics of Quantum Gravity."

I cannot read the title without cracking up. If Sokal had picked a better journal to publish in, his hoax would have never existed. The editors could not have possibly read the article, it would have been too obvious that it was entirely a joke.

Anyhow, to put this to rest, probably the wisest words ever spoken by Derrida:

"Poor Sokal."

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 30 23:42:12 2010 No.1247584 File: 35 KB, 126x126, 1285609434431.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>1247574 <3

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 30 23:44:12 2010 No.1247586 >>1247575 >non-cognitivism A good argument, but not necessary. Arguments against the existence of morality are like arguments against the existence of God - not my responsibility to make.

Anonymous Sat Oct 30 23:46:12 2010 No.1247591

>>1247584
For once, there is an actual intellectual conversation about the history of literary theory and philosophy, one which seems to be firmly grounded in events and facts instead of airy abstract concepts and theory itself. But of course the nihilists just want to talk about themselves without really saying anything at all.

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 30 23:48:12 2010 No.1247593 >>1247591 see >>1247586

>>	Deep&Edgy !pSkjEcB9sQ Sat Oct 30 23:51:12 2010 No.1247596 The best thing about nihilists is that they refute themselves the second they open their mouth

Anonymous Sat Oct 30 23:57:12 2010 No.1247610

>If Sokal had picked a better journal to publish in, his hoax would have never existed. The editors could not have possibly read the article, it would have been too obvious that it was entirely a joke.

This may be true, but the hoax itself wasn't so important to Sokal, I think. I believe he wanted to write his serious essay, the one on scientific terminology being flagrantly misused by postmodernists, and use the hoax essay as a means to get the serious one more attention from the public.

Literary theory managed to leak into the public consciousness in a much more affective way than any other school of thought or criticism. Postmodernism itself is more of a cultural movement covering many fields of discourse than it is a strict literary or philosophical movement.

If Sokal could capture the public's attention by forcing postmodernism to recognize its obfuscatory nature outright, then he would be able to destroy the meaning (or lack thereof) from within it -- sort of how Eagleton describes literary theory as tearing apart literature from the inside out, the bug metaphor and so on.

Oddly enough, by going to these specific lengths to destroy postmodernism, Sokal was actually practicing, not just theorizing, deconstructive thought. The entire methodology of the incident feels postmodern in essence -- there's a whole lot of self-reference and such going on.

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 30 23:57:12 2010 No.1247611 The best thing about D&E is that he refutes himself the second he flees the argument

>>	Anonymous Sat Oct 30 23:59:12 2010 No.1247614 >>1247593 Sorry, but I didn't see that post while I was typing my own. You must catch my drift at least? Sorry if you have responded since then. I've been busy typing out this fucker:>>1247610

Deep&Edgy !pSkjEcB9sQ Sun Oct 31 00:03:12 2010 No.1247623

>>1247611
Prescriptive ethical sentences cannot be true, however, descriptive ethical sentences can be true; If I say: "If you want to open my door then the necessary sufficient condition for doing that is turning the door knob and applying force to the door."

This kind of conditional value description has the logical form of modus ponens.

It does not state an ontological "ought" or "virtue" but rather the necessary and sufficent conditions for actualising a want, desire or preference, It is also predicated on the fact that: you actually want the object of desire stated in the conditional, if you don't then it doesn't apply to you,

Furthermore, if formulated correctly, conditional value descriptions are even testable. One could go to my house, and experiment turning my doorknob at differing angles and applying different levels of force. One could record the results and look for correlations manipulating one or another variable and the result.

Also, individual value descriptions can have a truth value.

>>	Deep&Edgy !pSkjEcB9sQ Sun Oct 31 00:06:12 2010 No.1247626 >>1247623 I should probably qualify all this by saying that it's predicated on a correspondence theory of truth. If you don't have any love for correspondence and are like a deflationist, well then fuck you.

Anonymous Sun Oct 31 00:08:12 2010 No.1247629

>>1247614
I catch your drift.

Although to be honest, if I really want something to confirm my moral nihilism, looking at the history of philosophy is ideal. Helps you see ideas, moral ideas included, as the expressions of living people, that die eventually with them.

Anonymous Sun Oct 31 00:09:12 2010 No.1247632

>>1247623
>true; If I say: "If you want to open my door then the necessary sufficient condition for doing that is turning the door knob and applying force to the door."

If, then statement inside of an if, then statement.

Recursion in text.

Fuck you Sokal.

I'm going to bed.

>>	Deep&Edgy !pSkjEcB9sQ Sun Oct 31 00:12:12 2010 No.1247640 File: 12 KB, 236x213, boo..jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>1247632 y so petty?

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 31 00:16:12 2010 No.1247648 >>1247629 interesting, who are some essential moral nihilist figures? id like to research this view for myself

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 31 00:22:12 2010 No.1247660 >>1247648 If you want to know more about how philosophy relates to culture and history, read The Decline of the West by Oswald Spengler.

Anonymous Sun Oct 31 00:24:12 2010 No.1247663

>>1247640
He acts so high and mighty, as if his sacred mathematical concepts are not interpolated into the physical world and then transposed into our systems of thought, speech, language and reality. For an example, "interpolation." Who would argue against this word's vast meaning? It has musical roots, linguistic roots and literary roots; but because it is largely a mathematical term the former discourses should be ignored? Please.

I know you're having fun with me, but Sokal has his head up his ass. I'm not defending crackpot theorists like Irigaray who will defend the argument that theory e=mc2 is sexist (although her argument is in metaphor), but there needs to exists a sensitivity toward language which will allow the mobility of such terminology.

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 31 00:42:12 2010 No.1247686 fuck that, OP. read bertrand russell and youre all set

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 31 00:52:12 2010 No.1247703 Bertrand Russell is to philosophy what Metallica is to metal.

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 31 00:55:12 2010 No.1247708 >Bertrand Russell >Bertrand >rand >ayn rand

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 31 00:56:12 2010 No.1247710 >>1247708 shat bricks

Anonymous Sun Oct 31 00:56:12 2010 No.1247711

OP, when you're talking about Wittgenstien's later works, are you saying that you didn't like the Tractatus? It's difficult for me to understand how you can qualify logical positivism vs OLP unless you were coached into thinking one had more value than the other. Even his Tractatus, has a mathematical feel and criticism of contemporary philosophers that only advanced students should bother with. How is it that you can call yourself a philosophy noob yet qualify this by saying that you only care for Wittgenstein's later works when understanding his earlier work demands that you understand the works of logical frameworks built centuries before he was born?

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 31 00:56:12 2010 No.1247713 Read Thomas Hobbes "Leviathan" He's the most reasonable philosopher of the "Enlightenment" era.

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 31 00:58:12 2010 No.1247716 >>1247708 >Bertrand Russell >Bertrand >rand >ayn rand >Random House Audio Presents Book 4 of A Song of Ice anf Fire; A Feast For Crows. Read to you by John Lee

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 31 01:00:12 2010 No.1247720 >>1247713 >He's the most reasonable philosopher of the "Enlightenment" era. that's not Locke

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 31 01:01:12 2010 No.1247725 >>1247720 Neither of those are Hume

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 31 01:01:12 2010 No.1247726 >>1247716 MY BRAIN IS FULL OF FUCK

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 31 01:03:12 2010 No.1247733 >>1247720 >Locke I don't buy into the Natural Rights thing.

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 31 01:04:12 2010 No.1247739 >>1247711 well like i said im relatively new to it all so just take my humble opinions with a grain of salt. positivism doesnt really appeal to me, especially compared to Witt's OLP stuff hence my request for similar work.

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 31 01:07:12 2010 No.1247749 >>1247733 neither do i, as a matter of fact. he is merely my favorite thinker of his era and i appreciate a lot of his later decentralist work

Anonymous Sun Oct 31 01:08:12 2010 No.1247755

Immanuel Kant was a real pissant
Who was very rarely stable.
Heidegger, Heidegger was a boozy beggar
Who could think you under the table.
David Hume could out-consume
Wilhelm Freidrich Hegel,
And Wittgenstein was a beery swine
Who was just as schloshed as Schlegel.
John Stuart Mill, of his own free will,
On half a pint of shandy was particularly ill.
Plato, they say, could stick it away;
Half a crate of whiskey every day.
Aristotle, Aristotle was a bugger for the bottle,
Hobbes was fond of his dram,
And Rene Descartes was a drunken fart: "I drink, therefore I am"
Yes, Socrates, himself, is particularly missed;
A lovely little thinker but a bugger when he's pissed!

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 31 01:10:12 2010 No.1247765 Fuck >Who was just as schloshed as Schlegel. Insert: >There's nothing Nietzsche couldn't teach ya' >'Bout the raising of the wrist. >SOCRATES, HIMSELF, WAS PERMANENTLY PISSED... >John Stuart Mill, of his own free will,

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 31 01:11:12 2010 No.1247766 File: 146 KB, 544x400, 1287858931067.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>1247755 i chuckled

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 31 01:11:12 2010 No.1247767 >John Stuart Mill, of his own free will, On half a pint of shandy was particularly ill. ICED ICED ICED ICED ICED.

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 31 01:12:12 2010 No.1247774 File: 21 KB, 366x331, 1286164499013.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] this thread made a turn for the AWESOME

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 31 01:16:12 2010 No.1247784 does /lit/ approve postmodernism?

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 31 01:17:12 2010 No.1247793 >>1247784 no

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 31 01:25:12 2010 No.1247810 >>1247784 Hell yeah, fuck metanarratives.

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 31 01:29:12 2010 No.1247819 >>1247784 I wish I could sage it to hell

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 31 01:30:12 2010 No.1247822 does /lit/ approve objectivism?

Anonymous Sun Oct 31 01:37:12 2010 No.1247832

>>1247793
Whether you like it or not, postmodernism is internalized in our contemporary theory, that is to say, the western school.

For the first time in history, dare I say, a movement of such decadence was able to shake the framework of the general ideologies of truth and meaning, so that no 'significant' movement could ever take its place. Philosophy, theory, criticism etc., you name it; these fields of discourse thrive on refutation -- one movement opposing or elaborating on the one preceding it.

Postmodernism, as odd and wonderful as it is, for the most part, put and to this movement. What came next, and manifests now, largely, is Historicism, Cultural Studies and Gender Studies. This dispersal of forms is unorganized, chaotic and seems to reflect the need of structure after the supposed "end" of postmodernism; the finality, however, was never quite realized -- I would argue we are still in it.

Not to bring in Eagleton too much, but his choice to focus on structures like theology, just after what happened throughout the 80s- 90s, is on a small scale, exactly what I'm talking about. Eagleton having influenced a blind march back into structure is one possibility; another, is of course, Eagleton follows the eventual, and moreover, natural decline of dencentralization, not unlike the English teachers, the Humanities and Academia.

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 31 01:41:12 2010 No.1247840 File: 33 KB, 300x453, k2565.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>1247478 Correct. Kierkegaard may be my favorite philosopher of all time. So overlooked.

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 31 01:45:12 2010 No.1247845 read zizek become a god

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 31 04:30:12 2010 No.1248162 >>1247845 please be a troll also, Socrates

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 31 04:37:27 2010 No.1248170 >>1248162 2dee4u enjoy living in the matrix

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 31 04:38:12 2010 No.1248172 >>1248162 2deep4u enjoy living in the matrix

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 31 05:09:12 2010 No.1248194 >>1247845 Zizek says read lacan and hegel to become a god. WHOM DO I BELIEVE?

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 31 05:17:12 2010 No.1248207 >>1248194 4chan

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 31 06:21:12 2010 No.1248280 >>1247832 What you say is very interesting. Where do you think this decentralization will lead?

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 31 06:30:12 2010 No.1248284 >and to a lesser extend stuff like Nietzsche and Aristotle. .... ffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu!!!

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 31 17:32:12 2010 No.1249047 >marxists http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UGbxjiTjhQY

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 31 18:40:12 2010 No.1249184 File: 82 KB, 500x334, 1287560019382.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>1247711 Not everyone creams themselves over positivism like it's the mid 20th century. Deal with it.

>>	onionring !Rrxa7zePwI Sun Oct 31 19:04:12 2010 No.1249219 moral nihilism is badly named. say moral antirealism or something appropriately epistemological rather than...normative.

Anonymous Sun Oct 31 19:14:12 2010 No.1249243

>>1248280
I'm not quite sure. Some will argue that decentralization is bad theoretical form, and actually does not exist. Sometimes decentralization can be read as a linguistic word game; the concept only exists (or this is a lack of meaning) in the spaces in between signs and signifiers.

Personally, I think a lot of it is crap. There has to be some center or else the thought of having a "decenter" would not be possible. I think the postmodernists really like their word play, and much worse, playing along can be fun too.

As far as how contemporary theory handles decentralization, well, I'm not too sure. I think eventually the western world will make a general swing back towards structure and religion, as it has already begun to. Sooner or later, the center will appear again and remain present until we are faced with another era of decadent philosophy.

>>	Anonymous Sun Oct 31 19:25:12 2010 No.1249256 Aristotle is retarded.

>>	Anonymous Mon Nov 1 05:48:12 2010 No.1250380 File: 39 KB, 425x600, 425px-Bundesarchiv_Bild_146-1987-121-30A,_Hugo_Sperrle.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Oh look I bumped it for you. Isn't that nice of me.

>>	Anonymous Mon Nov 1 06:49:12 2010 No.1250406 You're all impressing me with your knowledge on philosophy. I feel so stupid.

>>	Anonymous Mon Nov 1 07:46:12 2010 No.1250429 >>1247387 what is hume?

>>	Anonymous Mon Nov 1 10:26:12 2010 No.1250529 File: 10 KB, 241x313, hume.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>1250429 Oh hai there

>>	Anonymous Mon Nov 1 10:38:12 2010 No.1250533 File: 35 KB, 500x366, 14feb6-bitter-beer-face.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>1249256 >>1249256

>>	Anonymous Mon Nov 1 19:34:12 2010 No.1251545 >>1247420 must. have. sauce.

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