/lit/ - Literature

i want niggers to shit in my mouth

>>15936242
analytic philosophy
>1 + 1 divided by 10 plus 5 equals I'm right, you are wrong and x is the moral thing to do.

>>15936242
Continental chad sounds BASED.

what would Russel say?

>>15936248
this but unironically

>>15936242
Cringe

>>15936242
Where does this stereotype come from that continentalcucks care about feelings?

>>15936242
>science is for gays
Yes.

>>15936288
Because nothing they say makes a lick of sense.

>>15936294
unironically

it's literally just Platon vs. Aristoteles

>>15936300
Yes but they don't exactly say I feel this proposition is right therefore it is right (well maybe aside from Nietzsche).

>>15936294
Why is this board so much anti-science? I mean yeah I'm aware of the shitty implications of a society driven world but yall faggots discard its entirety like the fucking plage which is fucking retarded

>>15936328
science driven world*

>>15936328
Its not anti-science, its anti-scientism

>>15936328
Because it’s the equivalent of a chainsaw to their obfuscatory gibberish.

>>15936334
I mean, Scientism is just the application of science to things you don’t want it applied to.

>>15936346
>you don’t want it applied to
*you aren't justified in applying it to
Retards like you give science a bad name.

>>15936346
>Scientism
>excessive belief in the power of scientific knowledge and techniques.

>>15936354
Justification has absolutely nothing to do with it. Science is via-negativa, continental philosophy is via-positiva.
Continental philosophy = top-down justification of intuition, Science = bottom up rigorous construction and falsification of hypotheses.

>>15936249
>t. has never read an analytic philosopher

>>15936315
No, they just give propositions and then proceed to completely ignore the concepts of "proof" and "arguments". Byung Chul Han is currently the biggest offender, for example. His theories are interesting, that's why he gets popular. He then fails to completely skip over the pscyhological/sociological grounding that would exist for those theories and just immediately goes to the implications and overfitting every fucking thing to fit his model by talking in vague abstractions such as "the positive and the negative", "the alien", etc.

>>15936360
So that which Kant was arguing against, or am I misunderstanding something? Could you give an example where say an analytic philosopher unjustifiably applied scientific methodology to a problem which fundamentally can't be tackled by that? I would also like you to describe what you mean by "science" and how it differs from rigorous thought through the merging of empiricism and rationalism.

>>15936374
Application of the scientific method as the ultimate answer to everything including morality and epistemological values

>>15936360
>excessive belief
I don’t “believe” anything, I can testify that somebody has performed measurement of something else. I can investigate anything that exists within the dimensions of reality that we know of, “excessive” is a completely irrelevant arbitrary constraint.

>>15936398
Sounds like you should start at the basics of philosophy with Plato

>>15936334
>Its not anti-science
Yes it is.

>>15936410
>Yes it is.
Yes.

>>15936397
That clarifies nothing, thank you

>>15936402
Do actual physicists and physics students even listen to the guys on the right? Physicists and mathematicians (who are likely to be Platonists) strike me as smarter than that, it's the engineers that fall for them.

>>15936496
>Do actual physicists and physics students even listen to the guys on the right?
From what I've seen physicists are exactly like this, pure arrogance. But mathfags are so removed from the world that they don't care to think about anything except their autistic logic game.

>>15936242
You fools, this dispute is as old as The Greeks.

Based Protagoras had disdain for math and abstract models (read: “science”) long before the scarecrow “postmodernists”.

>>15936496
>likely to be Platonists
cease the shrooms, almost all of my friends are doing pure maths, theoretical physics, or something of the sort, not one could be accurately described as a Platonist in any sense of the word

That image is also shit, it misrepresents literally everyone but Krauss (who is just retarded). What the fuck does the Dawkins quote do here? I wager that everyone on the left would agree. And how does Nyememe being skeptic of idealism prove anything? 70%+ of big name philosphers, past and present, could have said the same.

>>15936496
No one in STEM reads philosophy

>>15936526
Protagoras was the only based sophist.

Anglo philosophy gives birth to le facts and logic retards like shapiro or dawkins. No thanks.

>>15936496
Physicists are the worst, it's pretty common for lobbyist to buy the signature of old physicist under shitty papers that have very little to do with physics to push their point of view. Only the physicists do that because they have absolutely no ethics.

>>15936398
You are making a whole load of metaphysical assumptions just here alone

>>15936242
wut

>>15936346
You mean applying observation of the material world to the immaterial and concluding that since it cannot be observed by something which is specifically to be applied to the material; the immaterial does not exist?

>>15936536
Those two have one thing in common and it's not a shared Anglo-Saxon heritage.

>>15936346
No it isn’t, it’s the replacement of religion with scientific consensus in a way that doesn’t upset the status quo. True scientism would advocate ethnobationalism, it wouldn’t be a bunch of Redditors talking about how epic spec travel is

remember that this is only divide that matters
you are all faggots itt

>>15936532
I read philosophy but I studied biology and now medicine rather than the purer STEM

>>15936242
Since when is Heihachi a philosopher?

>>15936254

Russell could not make sense of these times.

>>15936757
based

>>15936496

For a dissertation I wrote on genetically modified organisms I went to a plant lab in the biology department on my campus. I was most surprised when I discovered that everyone in this lab were being assigned philosophy of science texts largely in part because they were working on epigenetics.

>>15936288
I think the idea is that continentals are to be identified with the postmodern neomarxist sjws of mr. Peterson's.

>>15936496
I am a physicist and I think analytic philosophy is utter bullshit for trying to keep things as close to formal logic as possible and adhering to the scientific method while in the end still falling short because of the nature of the subject thus achieving nothing.

>>15936374
Once you get right down to it, there is no proof. Physics work because that's what we found. You want to eat because you do. At some basic level of your philosophy, there is a point that is simply defined as true.

Anglos with their autism was a mistake

>>15936536
They are not analytic philosophers.
Real analytic philosophers:

Frege
Russell
Wittgenstein (though a little unusual)
Carnap
Ayer
Popper
Strawson
Ryle
Austin
John Searle
Quine
Kripke
Putnam
Dennett
Rawls
Nozick
Singer
Plantinga
Swinburne
Flew
Mackie
Gettier
Churchlands
McGinn
Chomsky (philosophy of mind and language; not his shit politics)
Jerry Fodor
Chalmers
Parfit
David Lewis
Etc.

All of those are better than almost any continental of the past century.

>>15936294
this but unironically

>>15936374
>No, they just give propositions and then proceed to completely ignore the concepts of "proof" and "arguments".
Is there anything worse than making enormous claims, insulting everyone who disagrees with you, and then refusing to provide an argument for even a single one of the claims you've made? I can't help but look down on authors who do this.

>>15936872
If you trap one person alone in a room for a year he becomes mad. Now imagine the madness if you trap a few people on an island for centuries.

>>15936876
Not him, but I read Frege's Sense and Reference and I was very unimpressed. He identifies a trivial problem and then offers a trivial answer in a very self-aggrandizing autistic way. I don't really see the point.

>>15936328
>Why is this board so much anti-science? I mean yeah I'm aware of the shitty implications of a society driven world but yall faggots discard its entirety like the fucking plage which is fucking retarded
kys and get off this board, never return

>>15936876
>Frege
Ok
>Russel
Faggot
>Wittgenstein
Ok
>literally who

>>15936750
Look up Watson, the guy who discovered DNA. He got in hot water for saying as much. Even in his time his eugenics were considered racist and sexist

>>15936328
Imagine being cucked this hard by the Jew ideology

>>15936398
>I don’t “believe” anything,
>proceeds to explain how he believes in the scientific method

Is analytic philosophy just a way to cover up bad writing skills?

>>15936886
based analogy

>>15936876
>Russell
>Popper
>Searle
>Dennett
>Rawls
>Singer
>Gettier
>Churchlands
>Chomsky
>Fodor
>Chalmers
I'll give you the others but these are all shit compared to most continental philosophers.

>>15936920
Cover up? It's on full display!

>>15936890
Not an argument faggot

>>15936908
>muh Jew projection

Kys poltard

>>15936976
>Not an argument faggot
go away stefan

>poltard
you have been found out, kike

>>15937037
Why are polfaggots so obsessed with kikes?

>>15937065
Its just basic inferiority projection, I dont understand why they chose kikes tho

>>15937065
It allows them to cope with the complexity of the world which they can't understand on its own terms by fixing blame for all of the world's ills on a single identifiable group.

>>15936242
left sounds more based
right sounds like an autist

>>15937077
>I dont understand
>choose
yeah, we just woke up one day and decided on blaming kikes for owning the media, banks, porn industry, silicon valley etc. It’s totally not rooted in reality goyim, kikes have been kicked out of 109 countries but it’s never been their fault

>>15937104
>I won’t engage with them so I will just call the problem “complex” and sweep it under the rug

>>15937174
>>15937185
How do you arrive from that to calling everyone who disagrees with you a kike?

>>15936826
I think you should reconsider what I said as you completely missed the point regarding the abstracted models (the lack of empirical evidence being the point). Not to mention considering something as complex as the society in terms of fundamental principles of the universe is just ridiculous. We are so far away from the fundamental buildings blocks that the example given is pointless.

>>15936876
>Popper
>Real philosopher

>>15936883
There's a lot of pseudery in continental philosophy. A lot of pretentiousness. Some good stuff too but the way it is done is reminiscent to that bullshit pseudo-science field of psychology (starting with models to which you overfit data and which don't survive any empirical experiments). Obnoxious fucks unwilling to engage in intellectual honesty, right /lit/'s alley.

>>15936929
>Chalmers
>Russell
>shit compared to most continental philosophers
See a neurologist

>>15936532
>No one in STEM reads philosophy
False

>>15936313
I have seen you write ths over and over again, calling Plato Platon and Aristotle Aristoteles.

It doesn't make you look smart. We all know Greek is an inflected language. English is not. Please, if writing in English, use English conventions.

>>15936876
>not his shit politics
idiot

>>15936328
Nerds invented nuclear bombs
Nerds invented drones
Nerds invented OnlyFans

no one cares about gay autistic word puzzles

death doesn't give a fuck about the ontological status of indexicals or whatever gay ass bullshit analytics do all day. philosophy is about transcending death, everything else is recreation

>>15936328
We're anti-scientism.

>>15938338
>Nerds invented OnlyFans
based

>>15937837
That's not a convention, retard. Both "Platon" and "Aristoteles" are in nominative.

>>15936242
>I shouldn't waste my time with unsubstantiated opinions
>goes back to sucking Plato's cock

Daily reminder that when someone defends science or analytic philosophy on 4chan they are probably an undergraduate in engineering or computer science

/sci/ is a shit board but this shit doesn't even fly there, the people who actually know what they're talking about are just as against scientism and nobody likes analytic "philosophy." Why do you think all the analyticfags come here? Because /sci/ laughs them out even harder than we do

>>15939085
Do you call Socrates SOHCRATEHS too? And Jesus Yeshua?

Talk like a normal English user. We have conventions on what to call people, and it is very pretentious not to follow them.