>read philosophy book >every single sentence uses huge ass words and useless jargon that you have to look up >look up word that leads to more big words why do these pretentious fucks do this shit?

File: 29 KB, 657x527, 1496300716674.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Anonymous Fri Jan 31 17:47:35 2020 No.14640892 [Reply] [Original]

>read philosophy book
>every single sentence uses huge ass words and useless jargon that you have to look up
>look up word that leads to more big words

why do these pretentious fucks do this shit?

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 31 17:50:04 2020 No.14640906 >>14640892 Because the words describe very specific things and it's easier to write one or two words rather than a couple of sentences or an entire paragraph. Use your brain idiot.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 31 17:51:41 2020 No.14640917 >>14640906 no theyre just shit writers who try to sound smart

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 31 17:52:11 2020 No.14640921 >>14640892 What 'philosophy' book? Every new term should be clearly defined.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 31 17:53:12 2020 No.14640924 >>14640921 simulacra and simulation by Baudrillard

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 31 17:53:33 2020 No.14640927 File: 159 KB, 1900x1068, ug-krishnamurti-1-1900x1068.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>14640892 They won't help you much. Conceptual jargon and techiques can't help

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 31 17:55:50 2020 No.14640939 >>14640892 You probably picked up a book by some recent author who is responding to 20 other authors, each with their own vocabulary and peculiarities. And you expect to be able to understand everything right of the bat.

Anonymous Fri Jan 31 17:56:41 2020 No.14640946

>>14640906
but it does not need to be a word salad, either they furthermore discuss a topic, so the longer they discuss one topic, the more clear what those words are sounding and mean, and its the same with reading inbetween the lines, there has to be enough afterthought after every word

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 31 17:56:53 2020 No.14640947 >>14640939 yes

Anonymous Fri Jan 31 17:57:15 2020 No.14640949

>>14640927
They will help you in so far as assimilating into the acedameic environment, but it's all mental masterbation if you don't take that knowledge to further deconstruct "your reality". True philosophy is not an act of gaining, techinques, methods, or achievement, but of throwing away the junk and chains of conceptual narrowness

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 31 18:00:17 2020 No.14640974 >>14640924 That's pseudo-intellectual gibberish. Read Putnam instead, specifically "The meaning of 'meaning'" in: https://www.scribd.com/doc/77862546/Putnam-Hilary-Mind-Language-and-Reality-Philosophical-Papers-Vol-2

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 31 18:01:46 2020 No.14640985 >>14640946 Continental philosophy is all word salad. Avoid.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 31 18:03:25 2020 No.14640998 >>14640924 >reading a Frenchman You asked for it, they're known obscurantists

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 31 18:04:22 2020 No.14641005 >>14640892 more like >look up words that lead to more interesting books errytime

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 31 18:05:31 2020 No.14641015 >>14640892 Philosophy is just retards namedropping older retards. It is honestly gay as fuck

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 31 18:08:22 2020 No.14641039 >>14641015 That's just Continental philosophy.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 31 18:23:04 2020 No.14641114 To hide the fact that they have nothing of value to say.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 31 18:38:06 2020 No.14641207 >>14640946 Why should an advanced calculus book take the time to explain concepts you should already understand? Now apply the same thing to philosophy. Why should a philosopher reexplain basics or the idea another philosopher has already presented.

Anonymous Fri Jan 31 18:46:09 2020 No.14641263

>>14641207
woah careful on the strawman, calculus and math is just nature, noone on the other side of the math equation is attacking you with anything. the philosopher on the other hand is human and just a man, so whatever he says is not a profound law like math

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 31 18:47:19 2020 No.14641270 >>14641207 Both mathematicians and (real) philosophers will precisely define all terms before using them.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 31 18:48:26 2020 No.14641274 >>14641263 Are you drunk or just a retard?

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 31 18:49:11 2020 No.14641281 >>14641263 how do u know if mathematics is natural was it not all created by men just as philosophy is or are they both natural?

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 31 18:50:41 2020 No.14641291 >>14641281 you're right i guess i don't. but math is much more profound than philosophy. but you still literally attack an argument i havent brought up in anyway

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 31 18:55:00 2020 No.14641312 >>14641281 >>14641291 samefag

Anonymous Fri Jan 31 18:56:51 2020 No.14641316

>>14641270
Why should I precisely define what a continuous function is in a paper? Why should I precisely define what it means for a matrix to be invertible? Why should I precisely illustrate the proof of a theorem that has already been proven in a paper? OP's struggle with philosophy is the same. He is reading way above his level and understanding and has no conception of the groundwork that has been previously laid.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 31 18:57:56 2020 No.14641321 >>14640892 Are you using a proper dictionary of philosophy?

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 31 18:59:25 2020 No.14641327 If you limit yourself to everyday language you get everyday thoughts.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 31 19:02:20 2020 No.14641340 >>14640892 >read scientific journal >every single sentence uses huge ass words and useless jargon that you have to look up >look up word that leads to more big words why do these pretentious fucks do this shit?

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 31 19:04:28 2020 No.14641346 >>14641316 >Why should I precisely define what a continuous function is in a paper? In a mathematics textbook or monograph, not a paper. In that sense, Philosophy is unique. Even articles in philosophy journals will define all relevant terms up front.

Anonymous Fri Jan 31 19:40:59 2020 No.14641509
File: 125 KB, 400x381, 1563453080665.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>be philosopher
>discover new concept
>concept doesn't have a word yet
>create word for it
>brainlets get angry at me for not spending paragraphs writing out the concept in detail every time it comes up instead of using a single word

Imagine if you didn't know the word "car" and called people pretentious every time they used it over "a passenger vehicle designed for operation on ordinary roads and typically having four wheels and a gasoline or diesel internal-combustion engine".

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 31 19:49:33 2020 No.14641562 >>14641509 >the virgin car >the chad automobile

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 31 19:51:13 2020 No.14641575 >>14641509 OP never advocated for repeating the definition upon every use of the term, brainlet.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 31 19:53:47 2020 No.14641593 >>14641575 No he just demands you define any word he doesn't know, as if the author is supposed to anticipate his shortcomings personally.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 31 19:55:44 2020 No.14641601 >>14640892 Philosophy is like math, it builds. They use a complicated word as a shorthand for a concept that's been exhaustively defined previously That's why people say to start with the Greeks

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 31 19:55:57 2020 No.14641602 >>14640947 >open up differential topology textbook >can't figure out what's going on

Anonymous Fri Jan 31 20:08:18 2020 No.14641668

>>14641593
>No he just demands you define any word he doesn't know
I don't think that's an unreasonable request if the author is introducing a new term, or using an established term in a nonstandard way, or using an ambiguous term that has more than one standard definition.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 31 20:10:02 2020 No.14641676 >>14641601 >That's why people say to start with the Greeks No.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 31 20:43:55 2020 No.14641782 >>14641263 >naturalism Retard has arrived

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 31 20:45:07 2020 No.14641786 >>14640892 never felt that. only when i was really young. stop expecting complex shit to be in laymans.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 31 20:47:53 2020 No.14641794 >>14640924 I honestly didn't find it that obscure, definitely an accessible read, specially contemplating other works by Baudrillard, like The system of object

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 31 20:59:08 2020 No.14641839 >>14641601 yes

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 31 21:15:11 2020 No.14641895 >>14641340 To hide the fact that they have nothing of value to say.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 31 21:31:07 2020 No.14641970 >>14641794 Tell me, in your own words, one unique insight you have obtained from these works.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 31 21:38:32 2020 No.14642007 >>14640924 Never read french philosophy. The are literally all pretentious pedophiles.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 31 22:12:34 2020 No.14642157 >>14640892 lmao imagine having this attitude to any other discipline >read chemistry book >every single sentence uses huge ass words and useless jargon that you have to look up >look up word that leads to more big words what even is an ionic bond?

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 31 22:14:10 2020 No.14642167 >>14642157 Name a work of legit philosophy that does not define its terms.

Anonymous Fri Jan 31 22:37:13 2020 No.14642265

>>14641668
I'm not saying that you're wrong, coming to terms is absolutely important, but I think you're giving OP too much credit. He's not talking about "introducing a new term" or "using an established term in a nonstandard way" or anything, he specifically referred to "huge ass words" and "useless jargon". Jargon is literally just language and vocabulary particular to a group. OP is complaining that philosophers are writing about philosophy to other philosophers instead of whatever the fuck he's supposed to be that's so special.

Anonymous Fri Jan 31 22:55:34 2020 No.14642312

The noumenal value of a transgression, in so much as one my even transgress in any permeable sense of being, is surely inherent to the metaphysics of doubt. As such, the dialectic ineffably leads one to turn the page on the unutterably, the quantum becoming, yet always regard the unbecoming through the semiotics of the past. In this sense transgression is its own, self-incestuous, rebel. We may then begin to grasp the nature of Rebel Without A Cause.

Anonymous Fri Jan 31 22:56:50 2020 No.14642314

>>14642265
Sure, but the OP later clarified that he was reading Baudrillard, who is a French obscurantist with absolutely no interest in defining terms or in using terms precisely in accord with established definitions. So the analogy with mathematics etc. couldn't be more wrong.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 31 23:12:50 2020 No.14642358 >>14640924 Oh, i see... i guess next time try to find some actual philosophy, not french pseuds.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jan 31 23:18:05 2020 No.14642374 >>14642314 Well it's not like I read the thread before posting

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 1 00:38:50 2020 No.14642597 File: 38 KB, 214x276, 1573874897460.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Just keep looking up the words and eventually you'll learn something.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 1 00:44:57 2020 No.14642613 >>14641601 Not really Stop making shit up and polluting people’s brains

Anonymous Sat Feb 1 01:34:42 2020 No.14642745

>>14641970
The whole simulacrum thing has made me revaluate my interactions with media in general, particularly social one. The Disney/USA analysis also changed my general feelings and views towards non-places. Maybe all this stuff was said earlier but someone else and I haven't come across it yet, who knows

Anonymous Sat Feb 1 01:38:15 2020 No.14642756

>>14640892
But it's not pretentious, the words they are using have the meaning they are described as having, you just don't understand them yet. So learn them and increase your knowledge.
>>14641509
Basically this. Once you know what the terms they're using mean then deeper investigation becomes possible. The real question is why are people who are trying to read philosophy so resistant to learning? Why is challenging yourself and learning new concepts a bad thing?

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 1 01:44:51 2020 No.14642779 >>14640949 Why I didn't know that you sucked that many dicks.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 1 01:47:19 2020 No.14642790 >>14640892 they need a way to justify their shitty major, or they come from rich pompous families where everyone talked like that

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 1 01:49:31 2020 No.14642800 >>14641207 but there are precalculus and basic algebra books i can read to understand the calculus book. Where the fuck is the prephilosophy book?

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 1 02:03:39 2020 No.14642841 >>14642800 The Greeks?

Anonymous Sat Feb 1 02:07:54 2020 No.14642851
File: 273 KB, 640x640, 1580521867459.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>14642841
>I have to read thousands of years of discourse from the goddamn Ancient Greeks to understand what some rich pretentious faggot meant in the shitty rants he wrote in the 1800s
It takes more work to read some beta faggot's essay than it does to properly study calculus?
no fucking thanks.

Anonymous Sat Feb 1 02:42:47 2020 No.14642943

>>14642745
See, everything you just said is, at best, very ambiguous. Ignoring corporate media and ignoring social media is a no-brainer, hence trivial. Not an intellectual achievement of any kind. Beyond that, if there is some extraordinary insight we're all missing, please enlighten us.

>The Disney/USA analysis also changed my general feelings and views towards non-places.
Oh, for fuck's sake. What are you even talking about? Saying vague bullshit about "culture" ('non-places'?) is no way to go through life, son.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 1 02:44:16 2020 No.14642944 >>14640906 Unless you're, uh, you know... Ancient Greek.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 1 02:47:52 2020 No.14642953 >>14640892 I don't have a problem with the big scary words because I'm not a brainlet like OP but I am reading zizek and for every interesting idea he puts out there there are about 6 boring useless non statements that he expounds on.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 1 02:56:24 2020 No.14642976 >>14640892 Philosophers have high verbal iq but low spatial iq. As such, they overcomplicate things so as to appear like what they have to say is actually important. I lost all interest in philosophy once I realized this.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 1 05:31:47 2020 No.14643340 >>14640892 lmao git gud

Anonymous Sat Feb 1 05:50:21 2020 No.14643371

>>14640892
It's not about being pretentious, idiot. It is a fucking academic discourse you are reading when throwing yourself into philosophy. Try reading any fucking paper in any STEM field.
Neologisms and "long words" are used because they convey a lot of context in just one short word. When somebody writes a paper today and there is "Geworfenheit phenomenon" in a sentence it means "hey guys you remember the whole life work of Heidegger? Yeah? Assume that and now we keep thinking".
We don't have fucking time to explain to you every single fucking concept

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 1 06:10:11 2020 No.14643424 >>14641346 >mfw my textbook completely skips over dedekind cuts

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 1 06:15:49 2020 No.14643445 >>14642800 There are plenty of introduction to philosophy type books

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 1 06:17:21 2020 No.14643450 >>14642374 based

Anonymous Sat Feb 1 06:21:36 2020 No.14643466

>>14642800
there are literally plenty of tools for this. The greeks being the most obvious

>>14642851
Is this bait? Plato and Aristotle are some of the most important thinkers in history. If you don't want to bother understanding how to add and subtract don't get mad you can't just 'pick up' calculus

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 1 07:07:24 2020 No.14643595 >>14642943 >no its the children who are wrong

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 1 08:36:35 2020 No.14643902 >>14640892 words have IMPLICIT INTELLECTUAL BAGGAGE /thread

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 1 08:43:02 2020 No.14643930 File: 401 KB, 1178x1713, cultural brother.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>14640974 >reading americans

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 1 08:50:09 2020 No.14643972 File: 13 KB, 300x300, 2032.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>14642851 Go back.

>>	Anonymous Sat Feb 1 08:55:24 2020 No.14644002 >>14641207 This is in bad faith, philosophers don't use an agreed upon pre defined vocabulary, they define everything themselves and create their own meaning and fucking language at times. it's hardly comparable to mathematics

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