/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.4718969]

Is anyone else into philosophy? Its pretty cool reading what genius motherfuckers like this creepy douche bag have to say.

[Anonymous No.4718973]

I agree with you.

[Anonymous No.4718975]

>>4718973
>not sure if mocking me

[Anonymous No.4718979]

Hey, I also enjoy philosophy. Here, pic related, I enjoy this motherfucker's work. Look at it and accept it: he's the last philosophers of philosophers.

[Anonymous No.4718985]

>>4718979
I can't wait to read his work. I'm sort of going in chronological order of major philosophers now. Its going to be not as exciting once science and philosophy start parting away from each other.

[Anonymous No.4718988]

>>4718985

Yeah, I did the same thing as you, man. Watch out for Quine and Heidegger when you get to them; there's a fuckton of philosophic jargon in their texts.

Who're you going to study after Descartes?

[Anonymous No.4718992]

There are good philosophers today. Except they won't be considered great until after they're dead. They're politicized nowadays.

[Anonymous No.4718995]

>>4718988
I didn't read any Galileo yet because I heard his philosophy was not better than Descartes. Should I just skip to thee enlightenment after Descartes? And don't tell anybody that I skipped Thomas Aquinas. I'll read his work later.

[Anonymous No.4718998]

>>4718992
Who are they?

[Anonymous No.4719005]

>>4718998
Badiou

[Anonymous No.4719007]

give her the dick

[Anonymous No.4719014]

>>4719007
Why did that asshole have to tarnish his reputation?

[Anonymous No.4719017]

>>4718995

Yeah, but make sure to read Newton and Leibniz before heading on to late enlightenment. Enlightenment is essentially Rosseu, Kant, Locke, Diderot, Swedenbourg.

[Anonymous No.4719020]

>>4719017
And i'm going to read some Machiavelli before I go on to the enlightenment. I can't wait to read Locke!

[Anonymous No.4719024]

I like philosophy. Mostly moral philosophy because it has the most practical applications. I especially like the philosophy of this sexy muthafucker (since we're apparently playing the guess that philosopher game). Not that I completely agree with every word of it, but he makes some very good points. The guy's smart and covers his basis, and anticipates most arguments people are gonna bring up against him 150 years later.

[Anonymous No.4719026]

Philosophy magnifies the potency of everything you learn. You don't just absorb knowledge, you absorb wisdom.

[Anonymous No.4719029]

>>4719024

John "Muhfuckin'" Start Mill.

[Anonymous No.4719031]

>>4719029

STUART!**

[Anonymous No.4719035]

Martin "Nazi Balls" Heidegger

[Anonymous No.4719038]

Don't forget those China fags. I recently read this book about a certain china man, whose name I will not say. It's very well worth looking into. It's amazing the role ancient Chinese philosophies, such as the Mandate of Heaven played in philosophies that led to creation of the United States of America.

[Anonymous No.4719045]

Wilhelm "Muh Monads" Leibniz

[Anonymous No.4719051]

Jean-Paul "Le Schlong" Sartre.

[Anonymous No.4719052]

>>4718979
And at the end of the ladder, don't you find it meaningless?

[Anonymous No.4719055]

>>4719029
>>4719031
John Stuart Mills is the man. Because his ethical philosophy is that we should try to best of our extent to make those around us happy.
So reliousfags be all like "So what!? All you care about is that people are happy?"
And Mills just goes "Yes. What do you think religion is about? Making people miserable?"
Then religious fags are all butt-hurt 'cuz they just got told.
Pic related

[Anonymous No.4719056]

>>4719051
Sigmund "The Fraud" Fraud

[Anonymous No.4719059]

>>4719056
>penis.jpg

[Anonymous No.4719063]

>>4719055

This is my friend Immanuel "The Cunt" Kant. He would like to have a word with you.

[Anonymous No.4719066]

This thread belongs better in /lit/ than /sci/. That's if all you'll be doing is reading old philosophers and ignoring recent scholarship and actually engaging in recent topics.

[Anonymous No.4719067]

>>4719052

88constellations.net

[Anonymous No.4719073]

When you get to middle 20th century, make sure to read Georges Bataille. You won't regret it.

[Anonymous No.4719075]

>>4719066
Well, you can argue that this topic belongs in either board. Philosophy could be argued to be the starting of science and is basically the bedrock behind garnered reason. It still has implications in some areas of science, more along the lines of neuroscience and philosophy of science.

[Anonymous No.4719076]

>>4719066
By the way, what is the current trend in philosophy? Ethics?

[Anonymous No.4719087]

>>4719063
Is it weird that I associate Immanuel Kant with Ayn Rand ethics wise? I know they're completely different, but it's that Kant seems to really stress a moral code be logically coherent, and Ayn Rand is all about "rational" self-interest. I really hate it when people are more concerned with logic than they are with what they're using the logic to prove. It's like what do they think, that all other philosophers just pull ideas out of their ass? It's very belittling.
Kant sets up a logical framework like a motherfucking Godel, but doesn't actually give any hint to how people should act in the real world. And Ayn Rand builds up "rational" self-interest and when she finally does get around to how to act, she's like "Oh, you should be sociopathic manipulitive dicks."
Oh god, Im sorry to lump her in with a brilliant philosopher like Kant. I fucking hate that woman.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ooKsv_SX4Y

[Anonymous No.4719094]

>>4719076
I can't handle modern philosophy. Anything past existentialism makes me nauseous.

[Anonymous No.4719101]

>>4719094
Sartre's existentialism? I have his book, 'Being and Nothingness' and I shamefully either can't understand anything about it or understand little of it. Is there any prerequisite reading for it? And here I thought at the core of it is that you have the freedom to choose because you are born into this world without purpose thus you can create your own 'meaning'. However, that means you are responsible for ALL of your actions.

[Anonymous No.4719110]

>>4719076

In ethics it's basically utilitarians and virtue ethics bashing against each other. The later ones keep presenting strong arguments for why utilitarianism is BS, while the former just keeps biting the bullet.

[Anonymous No.4719111]

>>4719101
Wittgensteinfag reporting in; indeed that is the case. To understand Sartre's ontology and existentialism better you'll probably need to touch up on some of these: Nietzsche, Marx, Voltaire, Hegel and Schopenhauer.

[Anonymous No.4719113]

>>4719076
>>4719094
>Cannot into analytic philosophy

>>4719075
I agree with that. But if you're going to be discussing readings instead of actual philosophy done today, go to /lit/. No academic philosopher engages with the works of Aquinas or Descartes. Historians of philosophy are not doing philosophy.

[Anonymous No.4719119]

>>4719113
Necessarily that could be the case, yet most of the topics being discussed from the deceased philosophers are still relevant in today's philosophic thought. But yes, I agree, they're not being implemented in this discussion and probably should be taken to a more appropriate board.

[Anonymous No.4719139]

> Continental philosophy

You plebes disgust me

[Anonymous No.4719153]

>>4719110
Virtue ethics doesn't really makes sense to me.
A person is virtuous because he does good actions. I don't think a person does good things because he is virtuous. It's like saying somebody studies because he's an honor roll student, and not he's on the honor roll because he studies. It fails to explain why virtuous acts are good in the first place, other than that they're what virtuous people do, which seems like circular logic to me.

[Anonymous No.4719159]

>>4719139
>opinions
I think philosophy is something that someone should study on their own time, and something that you wouldn't get a degree in - as well as any of those other liberal arts subjects that you have in that edgy lit infographic. Philosophy is practically the most useless out of those tiers, but it is probably the best source of mental stimulation out of the tiers. You would be better off doing something in the hard sciences so you can actually move humanity forward.

[Anonymous No.4719178]

>>4719159
If you ask me, the only decent philosophy is from people who actually walked the walk. Like Sartre was a great philosopher because he was a frenchman living through World War II, and he was forced to incorporate the fact that horrendous suffering exists, but that there is still hope for humanity. Those /lit/fags will make shitty philosophers because they get their parents to pay for everything, while they sit around a college dorm room and read books.