/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.22627162]

>tfw you actually belong on /sci/ not /lit/

[Anonymous No.22627297]

>>22627162
Hegel belongs to >>>/x/ and OP to >>>/lgbt/

[Anonymous No.22627315]

>>22627162
Extremely wrong. Zizek joke about studying Hegel it's comparative literature. You're retar, you're treated retarded

[Anonymous No.22627389]

>>22627162
qrd? i know science of logic has some influence in /sci/ cycles but haven't kept up.

[Anonymous No.22627421]

>>22627389
Modern /sci/fags inherited a system of epistemology they largely remain ignorant of yet see as the most objective and indeed only possible framework of knowledge. Hegel partly paved the way for this system but it was his successors and critics who finalized it, notably Peirce among many others.

[Anonymous No.22627461]

>>22627421
books on this topic?

[Anonymous No.22627498]

>>22627162
/sci/fags have unironically ruined /lit/. how do we rid our board of these tourists? i want to go back to discussing classic works of literature

[Anonymous No.22627505]

>>22627162
>/sci/
The board has been dead ever since COVID
It's full of facebook tier conspiracy theorists now who post like they have never been in the same zip code as a university.

[Anonymous No.22627525]

>>22627505
speaking of science and covid. i remember during covid I was taking a class on philosophy of science and we were learning about all the problems of science and i was losing more and more my faith in modern science (even moreso medical science) meanwhile we were all wearing facemasks in class and there were flyers everywhere encouraging students to get safe and effective vaccines. it was surreal.

[Anonymous No.22627581]

>>22627525
>we were learning about all the problems of science and i was losing more and more my faith in modern science (even moreso medical science)
For instance?
I personally think the biggest problem is science communication. Media always wants big headlines, so if some discovery is made, it's falsely portrayed as either "This changes literally everything we thought we knew" which creates the image that every scientific field undergoes a big revolution every couple of years thus why should I believe anything in the scientific consensus, if another "this changes everything"-study is just around the corner.
Or it's "This will revolutionize everything, flying cars in 2 years guys" when that's clearly wrong and then people read that and lose faith in science when in 2 years it turns out that whatever alleged breakthrough happened it didn't in fact bring us flying cars. That recent room temperature super conductor thing is a good example of that.
Also I guess sometimes people read simplified explanations of stuff and are then convinced that that puts them on the same level as someone who has studied in a certain field all his life. People who don't understand how anything relating to quantum mechanics works but think they do are a prime example. I guess it's a less extreme case of when conspiracy theorists find out something that doesn't make sense to them and instead of going to learn why that thing is the way it is they claim its proof of the conspiracy.

[Anonymous No.22627665]

>>22627581
>For instance?
theory ladeness,
metaphysical ignorance or arrogance accompanied by unexamined metaphysical ptinciples,
extra-scientific incentives, i.e., corruption due to the restrictions on investigations and results from concerns for personal gain or loss,
the problem of induction,
the list goes on and on.

[Anonymous No.22628384]

>>22627421
>Modern /sci/fags inherited a system of epistemology they largely remain ignorant of
What a ridiculous claim. Only a massively coping philosopleb could come up with such a lie. Show me one scientist who doesn't know the scientific method.

[Anonymous No.22628419]

>>22627162