/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.2724459]

Anglosaxons,

why can't you understand continental philosophy? Why don't you study history of philosophy?

[Anonymous No.2724466]

because philosophy should serve the logical positivists only.

[Anonymous No.2724473]

The scientist stood in his lab. He was very busy removing the pesky gamma branch from his benzene ring when an English major wanted to play.
"Do you believe life has any meaning" demanded the English student, he is desperate to be in the lab and philosophy is his only tool.

"Go away, I'm busy. Look kid, there probably isn't any meaning to anything" Replied the busy Scientist.

"ahha, you're a nihilist, you can't survive without philosophy, I caught you out" shrieked the English student, rubbing his hands together and drooling from the side of his mouth.

"I'm not doing philosophy" yawned the scientist. "I just analyze and interpret the evidence. Stop trying to label everything with redundant buzzwords"

"But you took a philosophical stance, I'm important too"

"No, I just lean towards whatever the data suggests. I don't actually subscribe to any theories, I just gather data to support or reject them. Look I really am busy, can you either identify whether those are aminos by their carboxyl group, or just leave"

The door hit the English student on his way out.

[Anonymous No.2724480]

>>2724473
0/10

Dumb copy paste

[Anonymous No.2724498]

structuralism and poststructuralism are shit

postmodernism is shit

analytic philosophy is given 100,000x the importance it actually has to philosophy

[Anonymous No.2724505]

PHILOSOPHY

IS ONE OF MOTHER EARTH S CREATURES ,

MAN ,

U CANT "LABEL"

IT

OR PUT IT IN

A CAGE

OR PUT A HAT ON IT????

B CAUSE

I

WAS

BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOORN

FREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

AND I WILL

NEVER

B

A SLAAAAAVE!!!!!!!!!!!!1

/PHILOSOPHY

[Anonymous No.2724519]

>>2724505
stop trying to be REI

>>2724473
Stop trying to be that other tripfag

[Anonymous No.2724528]

>ITT: Sciencefags not understanding that empirism is a philosophical movement

[Anonymous No.2724538]

>>2724528
They just presuppose empiricism and laugh away any challenges. Pathetic.

[Anonymous No.2724541]

>>2724538
I laugh every time someone on /lit/ suggests arguments about empiricism's validity have any relevance. You guys are just so funny!

[Anonymous No.2724543]

>>2724541

[Anonymous No.2724544]

>>2724538
What I don't understand is what they find so frightening/repelling about philosophy. There's nothing esoteric or weird about plain old thinking, in my mind, at least.

[Anonymous No.2724548]

>>2724544
The people who are serious? They just don't care about the difference between phenomenology, transcendental idealism, etc. because it doesn't matter.

Ninety percent of the people on /lit? Just in it for the guaranteed replies.

[Anonymous No.2724551]

>>2724544
I think it's because they know that if they study the subject seriously they might end up with a conclusion other than empiricism.

[Anonymous No.2724553]

>>2724541
Take any facts for granted and you're pretty much disqualified from being a good scientist. :)

[Anonymous No.2724557]

>>2724553
No one said anything about being certain of empiricism, but name one relevant challenge that might inform any action taken outside of a philosophy or English department. Protip: you can't.

[Anonymous No.2724559]

>>2724557
a. Yes you did.
b. Ever heard of the observer effect?

[Anonymous No.2724562]

>>2724559
1. No I didn't; this is the literature board, learn to read.
2. >implying that's actually a challenge to empiricism as such

[Anonymous No.2724564]

>>2724557
What you're saying is completely beside the point: by depending on empiricism you still depend on a principle that originated in philosophy, however hard you try to ignore that fact. All scientific method is rooted in philosophy. Karl Popper's Falsification Criterium is another example.

[Anonymous No.2724565]

>>2724562
It completely nullifies the worth of empirical method pertaining to the particles you're trying to observe. That's why so much of quantum physics is purely theoretical. See the Copenhagen Model.

[Anonymous No.2724568]

>>2724557
Having a non-essentialist idea of subjectivity would stop people from publishing dumb books on evolutionary psychology.

[Anonymous No.2724570]

>>2724568
Evolutionary psychology is a one of many potentially valid ways to generate hypotheses. Of course you need to test those hypotheses; this isn't Continental philosophy where anything goes as long as it sounds good.

[Anonymous No.2724572]

>>2724570
>Literally has no idea what philosophy is about or how it works
God, this is sad.

[Anonymous No.2724580]

>>2724570
You don't test interpretive frames.
You just substitute them.

In sciences that have a good predictive power it's pretty easy to choose which paradigm you chose simply through the predictive power it has.

In sciences with low predictive powers it's only about what you manage to get to be the more popular (and hopefully, if you have good scientists it will be generally be the smartest).
Else what happens is that scientists come with years of delay upon ideas that have been in philosophy for years.

[Anonymous No.2724594]

>>2724570

>evolutionary psychology
>evolutionary
>psychology

[Anonymous No.2725064]

I'm not an Anglosaxon and I don't really know anything about continental philosophy... where am I supposed to start to learn about philosophy?

[Anonymous No.2725070]

>>2725064
Books are a good resource.

[Anonymous No.2725071]

Because continental philosophy is intellectual fraud.

[Anonymous No.2725083]

>>2725071

[Anonymous No.2725200]

>>2725071
>continental philosophy is an intellectual fraud
>logical positivism

[Anonymous No.2725224]

>stresses the need for rigor
>criticizes books he has not read

>continental philosophers are not rational
>justifies every premise by saying "its common sense"

>philosophy should be experimental
>sample is made of his two best friends.

[Anonymous No.2725259]

>>2725070
What books?

[Anonymous No.2725266]

>>2725259
Richard Rorty - Irony, Contingency and Solidarity

[Anonymous No.2725294]

>>2725266
Trash.

[Anonymous No.2725387]

>>2725224
Yawn.

[Anonymous No.2725428]

>>2725387
Actually it's: "Continental philosophy is true, therefore math has axioms" is true.

Know your classical logic.

[Anonymous No.2725463]

>>2724528