[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 341 KB, 1173x1600, foucault.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14861709 No.14861709 [Reply] [Original]

Will people like Foucault be seen as modern Sophists some time in the near future? Much of the work of Foucault, Zizek, etc. are purely unfalsifiable and are mostly mental constructs used to serve their own ends.

>> No.14861792

>>14861709
first) let's remember that the term sophist was used by their opponents

second) let's remember that Socrates himself was, to a certain degree, a sophist.

third.
in the antipositivist worldview being unfalsifiable is in of itself, not only an standar but if done right, an achievement.

4) they are mental constructs, maybe, but do not serve their own ends, they serve multiple ends for multiple groups and interests.

even the "posmodernists and the Frankfurt school" are criticized for refusing to give simplistic answers to the problems that they diagnosed, that's why some orthodox marxist simply rejected them as "pure theory" or another ideological construct of late capitalism.

I can't defend Zizek though, he's only an entertainer, "cultural critique" lmao.

besides, they are highly regarded for being somewhat original thinkers, you may not agree with them but they were intellectuals for some.

"are purely unfalsifiable", yeah culture doesn't work like that, and they are a big part of contemporary culture

>> No.14861924

shut the fuck up anglo lmao, the only thing Foucault says is that power operates through seemingly apolitical institutions in liberal societies. He's giving legitimacy to all the conspiracy theories out there, jews, CIA etc.. yet your corn-syrup brain was too dumb to understand any of his works.

>> No.14861948

>>14861924
>power operates through seemingly apolitical institutions in liberal societies
No shit, Sherlock. The guy says the most obvious things, and then buries these platitudes under a mountain of obfuscating bombast.

>> No.14861974

>muh falsifiability
This is philosophy idiot, they're not positing their work as science

>> No.14861989

>>14861948
you have to go back

>> No.14862003

>>14861974
Science and philosophy are continuous. Foucault is a charlatan not a philosopher.

>> No.14862016

>>14861792
>n the antipositivist worldview being unfalsifiable is in of itself, not only an standar but if done right, an achievement.
COPE

>> No.14862017

>>14861989
How's the AIDS treating ya, snowflake?

>> No.14862021

>>14861948
This is exactly my point. His core criticism of liberalism is true. Both much of his work is just word salad.

>> No.14862024

>>14861924
>the only thing Foucault says is that power operates through seemingly apolitical institutions in liberal societies
you forgot
>AIDS is a social construct invented to oppress gays
and
>but what if the child consents?

>> No.14862028

>>14862024
love that americans claim to be against the state but lose their mind when people reject laws of consent. eternal slaves

>> No.14862048

>>14862028
>Americans claim to like freedom and yet they don’t want to fuck 7-year-olds. Curious.

>> No.14862052

>>14861709
Marxism and Hegelianism is a science

>> No.14862087

>>14862052
No they aren't

>> No.14862097

>Foucault, Zizek, etc.
What list do the two suggest? They have very little in common besides being few of the only thinkers you know, clearly.

>> No.14862102

>>14861924
Foucault was literally on the CIA's payroll to serves as a dam against the horde of marxist thinkers that made up the majority of the French left.

>> No.14862109

>>14862087
How are they not? phenomenon are observable and more sound than empiricism

>> No.14862178

>>14862003
imagine being this retarded

>> No.14862180

>>14862097
It's a list of charlatans.

>thinkers
lol

>> No.14862188

>>14862109
>but muhhh statisticsssssss

>> No.14862193

>>14862109
Do you have Down Syndrome?

>> No.14862194

>>14862109
Thats not what science is. Zizek is just as unfalsifiable as the rest of the post modernists

>> No.14862198

>>14862180
Whatever, but then what are we supposed to make of the "etc"? Nobody here knows who else you personally think is a charlatan...

>> No.14862201
File: 172 KB, 800x450, 81F559C4-07F6-471A-925D-02848A324314.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14862201

>>14861924
Based and /thread

Foucault was an Uber Chad that even supported the Islamic Revolution in Iran. He was /ourguy/, even if he did like the dick.

>> No.14862208

>>14862102
>t. Angloid schizo

>> No.14862210

>>14862198
Any so-called "Continental philosopher".

>> No.14862211

Zizek pro-actively refuted him during the Peterson debate

>> No.14862215

>>14862198
And given that "sophist" is a charlatan for you, so "modern sophits" are basically just philosophers you don't find truth in, what separates this thread from just a plain Zizek and Foucault thread? (If you were to present it like this, you would be called a faggot, which you are).

>> No.14862217
File: 47 KB, 550x407, B738DBDE-B807-4A8E-99CC-A0B7061D64EA.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14862217

>>14862028
This. Angloids (especially the Amerimutt variety) think that their laws are ordained by god or some shit, lmao.

>> No.14862219

>>14862194
without using wikipedia, prove that falsifiability is the only valid method of all the sciences

>> No.14862229

>>14862219
I never claimed that

>> No.14862231

>>14862210
>>14862215
+ Your best shot in describing continental philosophy was Foucault and Zizek? A very peculiar, almost anti-philosopher from the end of the era, and a post-continental cultural theorist?

>> No.14862232

>>14861709
Calling a shitstain like Foucault a 'sophist' is giving him way too much credit and undue respect.

>> No.14862235

>>14862219
But it is. Science can only tell you what something is not, which is where Angloid empiricism falls apart.

>> No.14862238

>>14862232
>t. Reactionary dipshit mad that a French faggot deconstructed his entire world view
Lol, cope more, bitch.

>> No.14862242

>>14862210
>>Any so-called "Continental philosopher".

lmao, have you read all of them?
because if you have, then you are better prepared than 90% of american philosophers on Standford and Harvard.

and you should be paid for your lectures on why they are wrong or your published work on them

>> No.14862244

>>14862198
>>14862215
>>14862231
Gadamer, Lacan, Ricoeur, Lyotard, Deleuze, Foucault, Derrida, Irigaray, Badiou, Nancy, Rancière, Kristeva, Agamben, Latour, Zizek, Butler, etc. All modern sophists and pseuds. Cope.

>> No.14862253

>>14862244
Deconstruct the theory of gender performance for us.

>> No.14862255

>>14862242
They write meaningless nonsense. It's impossible to prove "wrong" a pile of unfalsifiable gibberish.

>> No.14862260

>>14862253
>do this nonsensical task
No.

>> No.14862262

>>14862255
name one idea of each, and say why that is the case

>> No.14862263

>>14862255
Maybe it is unfalsifiable because it is correct.

>> No.14862265

>>14862260
Because you can’t

>> No.14862272

>>14862244
Why is it so hard to say 20th century french theory? Everyone else here are heavily influenced by it.
And it's okay, your reactionary rejection of your culture in the name of your culture as manifested on a Chinese pig spanking portal is more >modern sophist than all of them.

>> No.14862275

>>14862262
Work on your reading comprehension, brainlet.

>> No.14862276

>>14862238
> projecting your own incel insecurities unto other people
The only thing 'deconstructed' in this thread is your momma's pussy by my big dick.

>> No.14862281

>>14862276
>failure to make an argument
Lol

>> No.14862283

>>14862263
All correct claims are falsifiable, asshat.

>> No.14862287

>>14862272
Imagine being this delusional.

>> No.14862288

>>14862283
Uh huh

>> No.14862290

>>14862283
fuck off stemfag

>> No.14862303

>>14862283
>>All correct claims are falsifiable
prove it, otherwise that's a very unscientific claim to make

>> No.14862310

>>14862283
this is what happens when a 21yo redditor reads Popper

>> No.14862311

>>14862265
No one can do a nonsensical task u retard

>> No.14862313

>>14862290
Falsifiability is a philosophical concept, dumbshit. Read a book.

>> No.14862314

>>14862281
I don't know, your mom was pretty convinced last night.

>> No.14862323

>>14862303
Scientific claims, by definition, cannot be proved. Don't post again until you familiarize yourself with basic philosophical vocabulary.

>> No.14862325

>>14862311
>>14862314
Cringe

>> No.14862329

>>14862283
What about math and logic?

>> No.14862333

>>14862325
Seethe

>> No.14862335

>>14862310
Cringe. None of this has anything to do with Popper, pseud.

>> No.14862336

>>14862313
So are the sciences, it does not stop brainlets like you from thinking these specific concepts are the word of god

>> No.14862345

>>14862329
Mathematical or logical generalizations are falsified via counterexample.

>> No.14862348

>>14862333
Cope. A French homosexual molested your worldview.

>> No.14862350

>>14862336
What on earth are you trying to say?

>> No.14862353

>>14862323
therefore being philosophy, unfalsifiable philosophy, then why is it different then the "conty" side way of doing philsophy?

>>14862329

obviously OP is a retard that doesn't know anything about that, otherwise he wouldn't be so stuck up

>>14862335
low IQ troll

>> No.14862361

>>14862348
>*dies of aids*
damn he sure showed me

>> No.14862368

>>14862350
That the only fields in which >>14862283 is an axiom are STEM

>> No.14862378

>>14862361
>dies of AIDS
Not before he spread it to your worldview

>> No.14862379

>>14862353
>therefore being philosophy, unfalsifiable philosophy
Philosophy is falsifiable, you moron. Are you playing dumb or are you really this fucking retarded? Holy shit.

>> No.14862383

>>14862368
Nonsense.

>> No.14862387

>>14862379
Cringe, you and OP are like the guy from college that didn't have any friends, read some wittgenstein and called everything he didn't understood "MeTaPhySiCs" or "LaNgUaGe gAmEs".

>> No.14862390

>>14862387
Are you drunk?

>> No.14862407

>>14862378
good summary of his “””career””” as an “””academic””” desu, fortunately I stay away from faggots

>> No.14862421

>>14862407
Oh come on, you aren’t going to lie to me like that. We both know that you wouldn’t be able to resist his meaty cock.

>> No.14862444
File: 46 KB, 589x466, 1563529747888.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14862444

>>14861709
*Fucko

>> No.14862455

>>14862383
I can argue. Anyways, if you hold this position from within philosophy and not as a STEMfag who discredits it completely, I have no problem with you.

>> No.14863211

is Focualt the best example of "play stupid games, win stupid prizes" ?

>> No.14863253
File: 64 KB, 600x750, peak_bug.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14863253

>>14861709
>unfalsifiable
>unironically trying to subsume philosophy under the category of natural science

You're the kind of guy that reads Madame Bovary or Hamlet, looks up DSM-V criteria on wikipedia, then diagnoses them with either borderline or schizoid personality disorder, and considers this artful interpretation and adequate understanding of literary works of art.
Your thinking has been profoundly poisoned by modernity.

>>14862052
>>14862087
>>14862109
>unironically buying into the anglo-conception of PSY-UHNZ instead of thinking properly with the term wissenschaft
Philosophers of (anglo-)science have spent actual centuries trying to come up with a definition of science that manages to capture their particular autistic proclivities and have failed.

>>14862244
Pic related, it's you.