/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.13881326]

Is there a bigger joke in academia than analytic """philosophy"""?

[Anonymous No.13881334]

>>13881326
Yes, continental philosophy.

[Anonymous No.13881336]

>>13881326
English literature departments.

[Anonymous No.13881340]

>>13881326
have you seen contemporary academia? it's basically the olympics of retarded pseuds

[Anonymous No.13881341]

>>13881334
Is It like Democracy is the worst form of government aparte from every other?

[Anonymous No.13881342]

>>13881326
>Real?
He actually did have better speech patterns long ago.

[Anonymous No.13881397]

I take car to school for my learning
I sit in class and they teach me philosophy
I sit and I learn about philosophy
P1. Learning is good
P2. I am learning analytic philosophy
C1. What I am is good
P3. Good things should be valued
P4. Good things are not jokes in the derogatory sense
C2. Analytic philosophy is not a joke (let alone the biggest joke)

[Anonymous No.13881871]

>>13881397
t. analytic philosopher bumboy

[Anonymous No.13881877]

>>13881397
you coukd make the same argument about womens studies though.

[Anonymous No.13881906]

>>13881326
Let's get to brass tacks. Analytical philosophy is the best you bums can manage. What makes you seethe about them is that they recognize that you have to be clear with your assumptions and methods of reasoning to get your conclusions from said assumptions. All they want is to make clear all the different organizations of thought that reasonable human beings can come up with. You may laugh at their specificity, but it's because people who aren't analytical philosophers fall behind the veil of obscurantism. You want to be able to hand wave your way to conclusions using prose like this is an English literature class where any interpretation you can use sophistry to convince others of is seen to be sensible, but they don't fall for it. Continental philosophy has produced pseudoscientific theory after pseudoscientific theory, for they are constantly at odds with evidence or hide behind the gaps of our knowledge. It is truly pathetic.
>>13881341
Basically

[Anonymous No.13881977]

>>13881326

[Anonymous No.13881981]

is pragmatism conty or anglo?

[Anonymous No.13881984]

>>13881981
Anglo.

[Anonymous No.13882068]

>>13881981
>>13881984
its neither, it doesn't fit into either tradition and is its own thing

[Anonymous No.13882092]

>>13881326
presuppositional apologetics

[The Based God No.13882324]

I suspect a lot of disgust for analytic philosophy stems from a perceived implicit "nihilism" or "anti-sensualism" in it. Which is totally wrong of course and these dummies are just too lazy to dig deep enough to see the realms of meaning found within analytic philosophy.

[Anonymous No.13882477]

>>13881397
Good, yes, but you could be doing better

[Anonymous No.13882486]

>>13882092
>implying everyone doesn’t presuppose parts of their arguments

[Anonymous No.13882978]

>>13881397
>get dumber by studying analytical philosophy
>what you do is bad
>bad things shouldnt be valued
>you are a joke

[Anonymous No.13882992]

>>13881334
Fpbp

[Anonymous No.13882998]

>>13881326
Did he actually said that? wtf I love Trump now

[Anonymous No.13883002]

>>13882998
>i'm retarded look at me!!1 i'm such a troll look!

[Anonymous No.13884596]

>>13882486
Almost everyone believes they can take things like "My hand exists because I can see it and touch it" for granted. Almost no one sincerely believes they can take things like "An almighty creator of the universe is accurately described by the Bible" for granted without any arguments to back it up.
Plus just on a pragmatic level if most people verbally disagree with your starting axioms, it's a wasted effort to just yell at people that no they actually hold the axiom deep in their heart. Try using the axioms most people hold to reach your God conclusion if you want to actually convince them.

[Anonymous No.13884636]

(Bada Bing --> ◇Bada Boom)

=> Shut da fuck up

All hail Analytic Philosophy, the only true Philosophy.