/fa/ - Fashion

>>13008216
People like you ruined the humanities

>>13008263
>People like you ruined the humanities
I have no idea what that's supposed to mean, but it sounds like you're parroting something that hack Jordan Peterson would say.

>>13008216

For a humanities student you're pretty shit at individualism

>>13008263
History major here, I agree wholeheartedly

>>13008216
A Rick and Morty t-shirt

>>13008281
exactly what i was thinking lmfao

>>13008281
I'm sorry, I don't speak conservative.

>>13008281
/thread

>>13008216
I imagine they're the type of person who mentions their major 5 times in 4 sentences and brags about getting an A.

>>13008322
Getting an A is honestly so easy in most universities, putting in the bare minimum effort gets you there because 90% of the class isn't even putting in any work

Here's the best outfit for you, it's a McDonalds uniform. You better get used to wearing it because you're going to wear it every day after you graduate with a degree in philosophy.

In all seriousness, consider what you're doing. Getting A's in a joke course like philosophy doesn't mean anything, these courses are designed to feed the Eli'sha Davies then wrote an adorable letter to Americanstudent's ego and then leave them in massive debt when they're done.

Just warning you, you should at least take some math courses or something.

>>13008401
Meant to say, designed to feed the student's ego and leave them in massive debt when they're done.

Got to say, a philosophy student paying to read books is so fucking funny to me

>>13008216
Can you read Greek? If you can't you aren't a real academic.

You should dress like everyone else.

>>13008401
>le worthless degree meme
>thinking that the point of college for employers is skills/knowledge

OP you're a faggot, I'm going to steal your gay thread.

How do I dress to get a Kurisu gf?

Philosophy grad here. The kids in my classes didnt give a shit how they dressed, just wear what you want.

>>13008274
:^)

>>13008291
Unironically this

Skip the irony and move on to post-irony, maybe you could handle post-post-irony in a year.

>not being an elite dark arts student instead

while you're learning how to be a cuck in your philosophy classes, I'm learning how to conjure up demons in chemistry.

>>13008216
Just google "douchebag numale" and whatever comes up should be your next fit, if it isn't already.

>>13008451
>thnking that the point of college for employers is skills/knowledge

Yes, thats exactly what it is.

I used to think like you when I was a 19 year old college freshman, luckily I realized that I was wrong before it was too late.

Humanities degrees (aside from law) only exist to suck money from upper-middle class white kids. They give you A's to stroke your ego and make you think you're smart and special.

On the other hand, degrees that are actually in demand from employers aren't there to stroke your ego, the university wants to produce the best graduates they can from these degrees so they can garner a good repuation.

>>13008274
why would he say that?

>>13008281
Couldn't have said it better myself.

>>13008531
I used to think like you
then I took student loans to the knee.

And now I still think like you, but poorer.

>>13008451
>>13008401
It is a joke course, I wrote got a B+ on my 2nd year ethics final and essay which was 80% of my grade. I didn't attend lectures and put about 20 hours total into the essay and studying for the exam.

>>13008216
Camus-core, you pretentious dick head. I bet you unironically read Simone de Beauvoir

Here you go, essential philosophy major core.

>>13008761
I am disgusted to admit I kekkd

>>13008274
i majored in law besides the philosophy faculty, he is 100% right

and im a composer too so you cant even say im some capitalist drone

>>13008263
That's how I'm gonna walk my dog from now on. His paws will never touch the earth again on our evening outings.

Orange Jumpsuit

bump

>>13008785
Not a bad idea.

Does anyone know what kind of jacket he's wearing in this picture?

>>13008216
>What do you imagine philosophy students looking like?
Hungry and welfare because good luck finding any job with this though interesting, but in the end useless degree.

>>13008401
i'd never study something just to get a good job

>>13012075
Study stuff you are intrested in evening school after your job. We live in a time where even last nigger studies, so it's hard to impossible to get anything that pays more than wagecuck-job without degree. It's sad, but it's a truth and you can only either do this or strave by flipping burgers.

>>13008216
I feel like this was bait. If so, well played. Seem to have had some success with that.

There's been only a couple suggestions and they weren't much to go off of.

>>13012075
I'd never pay to study something that won't better my socioeconomic prospects. There's your free time for that.

>>13011779
Some kind of pea coat.

>>13008401
Kek at these clueless neckbeards who don't get that just being an outgoing Chad who networks will get you anywhere you want to be.

>M-muh STEM

>>13012075
you wasted $150000 on an education you coulda got for $1.50 in late fees at the public library

>>13008223
FUCK i'm crying

>>13013445
>outgoing Chad
>philosophy student
Chads study economics and get rich.
Smart people study stem and get rich.
Creative people paint/compose/direct/write for breakthrough and get rich.

Losers, betas and daughters of rich parents study useless hobby-tier shit like philosophy, gender science or ahrt and get into welfare-line near Tyrone and Miguel if they don't manage to suck enough dicks to get married earlier.

>>13013424
>Pea coat

Every philosophy professor I've ever seen on my campus wore a cowboy hat, so get that or drop your major.

>>13011779
It looks too light coloured to be a pea coat of the period. Could be an ulster coat, and i would recommend to get an ulster coat over a pea coat

Molding your look and personality around a degree isn't effay

>>13014883

unless...

>>13013451
Will Hunting bar scene. You didn’t even use quotation marks. Shameless

>>13014883
That's not really the idea. Having nice fits is just fun.

You North Americans make me laugh. No wonder you live in such a fucked up society, you don’t even care about education and shit on the few ones that dare to think a little outside of the box. Lucky for the rest of us, nobody gives a shit o respect United States opinions anymore, and in the majority of the world, humanity sciences and intelectuals are very respected, so does they work towards the progress of the humanity.

>>13008281
>Assuming he values induvidualism

>>13015745
Dont be too harsh on them. If they dont make enough money their government will literally leave them to die on the streets

>>13008216

ITS A BAIT THREAD

>>13015880
>>13015873
>>13015872
>>13015871
>>13015870
>>13015868
>>13015867
>>13015864
>>13015862
>>13015860
>>13015858
<3

>>13016245
np

>>13008223
>>13008263
>>13008281
>>13008287
>>13008291
>>13008322
>>13008401
>>13008438
>>13008452
>>13008492
>>13008814
>>13011949
>>13014442

>>13008263
people like u ruined humanity

>>13008310
individualism is not specfically capitalist1, read more theory..

1 - see stirner

>>13008876
hes a transphobic charlatan and completely fails to understand what he critiques

>>13015436
not that anon but..
it clearly is the idea when youre mentioning the degree retard

>>13016289
Philosophy today is a lot different from philosophy in the early 20th century.

There's absolutely value in the field but it's also gotten a bad name from certain currents in it. IMO Kant makes some great points in the intro to his Prolegomena.

t. Physics major who's taken his fair share of philosophy courses

>>13008782
>i had an easy professor therefore all philosophy is a joke

>>13016409
>Philosophy today
I don't see what you're looking at. If you're talking about pop philosophy, or talking heads, then sure, but it seems to me that when people trash philosophy, they're dismissing that along with everything pre-2000s.

>it's also gotten a bad name from certain currents in it
Such as cultural Marxism?

>>13016441
>Such as cultural Marxism?
What you call cultural marxism is egalitarianism and social progress, which threatens the establishment and people who are used to being in power, because different people who were once subordinate are now fighting for a level playing field. Make no mistake, the human race can be a bunch of selfish, scrooge like people, and that is why we have those among us who call what is happening "cultural marxism", when in fact it is an advancement towards a more fair and egalitarian society.

If you equate capitalism with an inherently unfair system where some get payed exponentially more while not working any more than those they employ, parallel to the way that minorities in the united states get screwed over while a few people get all the advantages, then yes I would say I see a fair deal of inequality in the society we live in similar to the inherent conditions of unregulated capitalism. Socialism and capitalism exist on a spectrum, and this is not a matter of one over the other, but a balance, is what I would say to anyone who is against the economic principles of marxism.

If you truly feel that there should be social inequalities, then you really are no different from a fascist, and no matter what you say, there will always be those who want to shut you the fuck out and help the disadvantaged. Hail ethical society, fuck fascism.

>>13016565
>What you call cultural marxism is egalitarianism and social progress
Calling it "social progress" is your subjective assessment of it. It's correct to say that it values the state andor concept of 'egalitarianism'.
>which threatens the establishment and people who are used to being in power
It threatens a certain sector of the establishment. Wealth redistribution goes against the interest of the wealthy, mostly in the commercial sector, but it requires giving power to the government to carry out this wealth distribution. More power such as this can lead to the entrenchment of an establishment or elite in the government sector.
>Make no mistake, the human race can be a bunch of selfish, scrooge like people, and that is why we have those among us who call what is happening "cultural marxism", when in fact it is an advancement towards a more fair and egalitarian society.
There are at least two kind of conceptualizations of equality: equality of opportunity, and equality of outcome. Equality of opportunity prizes giving everyone a fair chance to succeed in life, while equality of outcome prizes making sure everyone gets the same standard of living, as high as you can give them. Cultural Marxism, or rather contemporary mainstream liberalism, is an equality of outcome philosophy that tries to corral everyone into more or less the same standard of living---but this has some costs that harm "equality" in other senses of the word.
>If you equate capitalism with an inherently unfair system where some get payed exponentially more while not working any more than those they employ... then yes I would say I see a fair deal of inequality in the society we live in similar to the inherent conditions of unregulated capitalism.
You have a misguided image of capitalism. First, you conflate the profit of the business owner and the employee. Who "pays" the business owner is the customer; who "pays" the employee is the business owner.
cont.

>>13016565
>>13016597
cont.
>Who "pays" the business owner is the customer; who "pays" the employee is the business owner.
The business owner has many "customers", or will strive to have as many as possible, whereas the employee will only have the one "customer", their employer, the business owner. As the employer gets more and more customers, their revenue increases; the employee being under contract for a certain amount of pay, regardless of whether the business gets more or less than enough customers, will see no change in their wages outside of raises or bonuses. My point is that it is entirely possible and not at all unfair, from an equality of opportunity standpoint, to end up with the situation you describe as "some get payed exponentially more while not working any more than those they employ". You only judge it as unfair because you are valuing an equality of outcome standpoint that ignores certain critical facts, such as the amount of risk involved in starting a business, the large amount of capital required to start one, the non-guarantee of profit of the businessowner versus the employer, and so on. Equality of outcome demands that the potential harm that the business owner took on in starting their business and operating it is deemed less weighty than the ideal of equal compensation for the employee to their employer. You call that fair; but you should easily see why others would not.

>>13016597
>You have a misguided image of capitalism. First, you conflate the profit of the business owner and the employee. Who "pays" the business owner is the customer; who "pays" the employee is the business owner.
The profits of the united states are set up in a top heavy "trickle down" system, in which the wealth is concentrated on the top and those on the bottom do not receive that wealth. There needs to be regulations on society so that the wealth isn't simply taken by the top wealthiest people in society, and people who work their asses off at lower income jobs can make a living. Countries like the netherlands have higher minimum wage and social programs which are mandated, and they have less working hours, they get payed more, and they are some of the happiest countries on earth. Not accepting marxism is simply a failure to look outside of own's own cultural proximity and find different ways of life.

>>13016605
>the non-guarantee of profit of the businessowner versus the employer
versus the *employee

>>13016565
>Socialism and capitalism exist on a spectrum
That is quite unimaginative thinking. Of course there will be no alternatives to either system if people insist on seeing them as the only two possible options. Be wary of dichotomous thinking.
>this is not a matter of one over the other, but a balance, is what I would say to anyone who is against the economic principles of marxism.
So you would like a cross between socialism and capitalism as the socioeconomic system? As far as I know, this is not what the strain of leftism of which cultural Marxism is a part has in mind.

>If you truly feel that there should be social inequalities, then you really are no different from a fascist
That is not what capitalism compels. The social inequality will be a mere fact of life, and not a desired situation. It is not, "There should be social inequalities", but rather, "There will be social inequalities". It is a consequence of the system that, ideally, will punish the grasshopper who watches the ants prepare for winter.

>>13016623
Saying that there will be social inequalities is just an excuse not to do anything about them.

>>13016608
>The profits of the united states are set up in a top heavy "trickle down" system, in which the wealth is concentrated on the top and those on the bottom do not receive that wealth.
I assume that by "the top", you mean business owners and upper-level management, or more generally whoever is an employer, and by "those on the bottom" you mean workers, employees, and the unemployed.
Leaving aside the unemployed, within a typical business, yes, the higher up the chain you go, the greater share of wealth you net, for the reason that I said before about customers.
>There needs to be regulations on society so that the wealth isn't simply taken by the top wealthiest people in society
Where does this wealth come from? Again, I come back to my explanation about employer, employee, and customers. The business owner decides, with their employee, how much the employee's labor will be compensated. This is a more or less fixed amount, that the employer is obligated to pay whether or not the business does well. So the employee is financially secure, and does not share their employer's risk. However, they consequently do not get more wealth as the business does better like the employer does; but the employee, upon being hired, agreed to these terms.
"Society", the economy, is made up of myriads of these relationships. Therefore, in saying that
>There needs to be regulations on society
you are saying that the government needs to intervene in how these businesses run themselves---implicitly, that it is wrong that successful business owners are rewarded by profit. What, exactly, do you propose?

>>13008452
Long drapey lab coat and black unkept hair ofc.
I.e. Mad Scientist Core

>>13014443
>>13014570
http://www.getkempt.com/article/9468 brainlets

>>13016696
To address the specific problem of "trickle down economics", I propose that we raise taxes on the wealthiest .1 of 1%, who own half of the wealth. There is no reason why someone needs to be a multi billionaire while someone who works 2 jobs to feed their family can barely survive on what they have. There needs to be government mandated programs to take the wealth of the wealthy, because they do nothing but hoard their wealth and the poorest of our society do not see any of it - trickle down does not work.

As for the other problems, there is spending which is out of control in the united states which needs to be under control. The foreign interventions, and the fact that we spend more on our military than the top 6 countries combined, as well tax cuts for the wealthy, are among several of the ways that the united states spends irresponsibly, and could use that irresponsibly spent wealth to actually help the citizens of it's country. Social programs are not "free stuff", it is responsible spending in a way which strengthens the nation.

If our nation is filled with poor uneducated people with bad health care, how the hell are we going to compete with other modern nations? The united states is a failing super power, and we will continue to see more failure as we break the knee caps of everyone but the wealthiest people in our nation.

>>13016608
>people who work their asses off at lower income jobs can make a living
These people tend to be living in highly desirable urban areas like New York, Los Angeles, Portland, and Seattle, and at low-skill jobs like customer service. Meanwhile, people with a marketable skill are usually able to get by, because their employer will compensate them for their labor accordingly at a higher pay grade. The people who don't do well also tend to be burdened with families to feed, and are sometimes guilty of spending on non-necessities. There are a variety of factors that come into people not being able to "make a living" besides their not being paid "enough" by their employer. The simple solution is still to move somewhere more affordable.

>Countries like the netherlands have higher minimum wage and social programs which are mandated, and they have less working hours, they get payed more
And as you can see here
https://www.expatax.nl/tax-rates-2016
They pay heavily for it in total tax rates up to 2/5 of their income---~40%.
Now, you might be willing to accept a loss of 40% of your income and be happier in exchange for these government mandated programs, but imagine how many fewer things you could afford taking such a pay cut than you do now. It's not a palatable prospect for a lot of people.
>Not accepting marxism is simply a failure to look outside of own's own cultural proximity and find different ways of life.
Cultural Marxism isn't the same thing as Marxism, so we're discussing something different than the original prompt. And Marxism as an analytical method is different from Marxism as an ideology. As an ideology, Marxism assumes that the workers, or the state, or the state and the workers, can be effective business owners like enterprising individuals, which is up for debate.

>>13016642
They may well can be. Who wants to feel sorry for a poor woman as this: a single mother college dropout who spends her welfare food money on junk food and eschews taking time to acquire non-government income, instead spending the time seeking entertainment? Social inequalities are not always the fault solely of the system. Individual responsibility and life choices do often come into play in a big way

>>13016716
>To address the specific problem of "trickle down economics", I propose that we raise taxes on the wealthiest .1 of 1%, who own half of the wealth.
Which taxes? Individual income taxes? Corporate tax rates? Property taxes? All of them?
According to these two articles,
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/45-of-americans-pay-no-federal-income-tax-2016-02-24
https://taxfoundation.org/summary-latest-federal-income-tax-data-0
>The top 1% of taxpayers pay a higher effective income-tax rate than any other group (around 23%, according to a report released by the Tax Policy Center in 2014) — nearly seven times higher than those in the bottom 50%.
>The top 1 percent (1.3 million filers) paid a greater share of income taxes (38.1 percent) than the bottom 90 percent (122.4 million filers) combined (29.8 percent).
Do you believe that this is not enough money being collected? Or are you willing to entertain the possibility that the government is rather handling that tax revenue in an inefficient manner? For rather than seeing
>someone who works 2 jobs to feed their family can barely survive on what they have
and believing that the wealth is being hoarded by the rich, you can instead believe that the government isn't spending the money they do get from the rich well enough to raise the poor's standard of living.
>There needs to be government mandated programs to take the wealth of the wealthy
There already is.

>>13008216
>I got an A
>In philosophy

>>13016806
Fuccboi philosopher

>>13008216
Minus the sandals.

>>13016808
more just a typical college student. when I was an underclassman, I wasn't wearing any of these fits, nor is anyone in my department. It's a retrospective ideal. I was wearing slim/skinny jeans and a hoody.

I'm posting a range of ideas about this nebulous concept of the philosophy major. The image in question captures a more realistic look as well as a more hip one. If it's not your style, that's fine.

Is there any particular direction posted so far that lurkers would like to see more of?

>>13016831
They all look nice, but some of them look like they would be over dressing for philosophy class.

>>13015867
I could really use some pants like this. All of my pants are thin fitting jeans and some tan levi pants.
>>13015870
Easy, simple, good style. Quiet and intelligent looking.
>>13015873
I like this one, I don't know where I'd find those sorts of clothes though lol.
>>13015880
This is one style which I plan on doing this year, it's similar to the style in the OP with a few variations on color and style.
>>13016779
I'm particularly fond of this one. It looks attractive, cute, and understated.
>>13016783
Simple, good.
>>13016794
Looks a little over dressed, a little over stated, but I love the texture and color of that coat, and the tight black jeans and striped shirt is something that I did last semester. I would get some black boots, but ones a bit more understated and simplistic in their design.

>>13015867
I also want to say that I love the design of these shoes. Simple and elegant looking. That sweater is nice too. So are the pants. The slight blue of the sweater is just offsetting the other blacks so it doesn't look like too much black. I like the baggy sweater to thin pants look too.

>>13008960
That's how you get an overweight dog

>>13016441
fuck off /pol/ cultural marxism isnt a thing

>>13017484
Do you believe the politicians and intellectuals who changed the West were always forthright about their intentions?

I hope those condemning the humanities read deeply in their spare time, but I doubt it.

>>13008216
I don't know OP, but I can tell you the most /fa/ philosophers are the French Nietscheans: Bataille, Foucault, Derrida, Heidegger (he's German though); 20th century continental thought in general. Girls aren't big into Nietzsche himself because of his machismo. The people I just mentioned are softier and trendier without being TOO soft. If you want to be TOO soft and come across as a total pussy then be a guy who specialises in feminism. Derrida in particular they love because of the psychoanalytic connection (psychoanalysis in general is big with the ladies). I'll also let you in on a little secret: Wittgenstein. The bitches love Wittgenstein, and nobody knows why. He was a homosexual misogynist but he has a disproportionate amount of female interpreters.
Stay far away from dusty positivist science-worship crap.

>>13017889
>If you want to be TOO soft and come across as a total pussy then be a guy who specialises in feminism.
I'd like very much to come across as a total pussy, as a matter of fact. I find gender norms to be totally stupid, and I find androgyny ala David Bowie (just to give an example everyone knows) to be quite beautiful.

Otherwise, very nice suggestions. I like your knowledge of these philosophers, Bataille isn't mentioned much. Very good writer, I like Story Of The eye a lot.

>>13017907
Although, I generally don't go out of my way to try to be androgynous. I'm just saying I really like that style, and I have no problem being feminine, wearing dresses and stuff like that. I just usually don't because it feels weird to do it in public.

>>13008216
>>13008785
>>13011779
>>13016289
>Does anyone have any fits or jackets particularly which are perfect for a philosophy student?

FAGGY /LIT/ KNITWEAR + SMOKE + BROODING BUTTPLUG FACE EXPRESSION= NICE PRETENTIOUS CO$$EGE FAG

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fn6pNeiBcxQ

INFO ON THOSE GLASSES ALSO

>>13008263
>People like you ruined the humanities

THIS

>>13017907
>>13017918
You can do that without being a Male Feminist (TM) though, particularly with people like Foucault and Derrida there's a lot of gender analysis without succumbing to naive or simplistic political views. Feminist psychoanalysis is good for that too. Judith Butler's Gender Trouble is actually really good (she went off the rails later imho). She follows from Foucault too.

>>13008216
Philosophy is good but trying to dress the part is kinda lame. Just be you and stop conforming to some bullshit standard of dress or whatever.

>>13017957
Judith Butler's theory is certainly something that I've considered very strongly, and I have to stop myself from going on a rant about right now. It's influenced the way I think about the world a lot.

>>13017952
>BROODING BUTTPLUG FACE EXPRESSION
LMAO

The sunglasses are suncloud. I got them at a wilderness shop
https://www.rei.com/product/870571/suncloud-cutout-polarized-sunglasses

>>13018004
>BROODING BUTTPLUG FACE EXPRESSION

its not a meme, look at camus, hitchens...all pretentios fag exp with a ciggie.

If I were you I would wear TNF + affliction and true religion just to mess with those faggy snobs.

Pic related is how successful philosophers dress

>>13017997
Butler just applied to gender stuff that had already been said by Foucault and Wittgenstein (she doesn't mention Wittgenstein by name but she does mention Austin who is pretty much just Wittgenstein-lite). See how all this stuff comes together :)

Caring about your appearance will make it very apparent you're not really a philosopher. Have you even hung out on that part of campus? Socrates hung out naked whenever he could and forgot shoes even at social occasions.

>>13018069
>Caring about your appearance will make it very apparent you're not really a philosopher.

>>13017010
>They all look nice, but some of them look like they would be over dressing for philosophy class.
That is true, but then being a Philosophy Major itself is overdressing for Academia.

>I could really use some pants like this.
The cut of it is called 'extra slim' or 'extra skinny', and it has maybe been tailored to his body. I too really like it compared to the skinny jeans I'm used to and now worn out by.

>I like this one, I don't know where I'd find those sorts of clothes though lol.
The jacket is a tuxedo jacket that is either long or slightly too big for him. You can tell by the lapels. The shirt seems to be a tank top, and the pants are pinstripe dress pants, possibly pleated.

>Looks a little over dressed
That one is supposed to represent a look if you tried to be more of a normal young adult, a more casual look. I'd say it's more realistic for what an aspiring fashionable college student would wear.
I wear black boots: Turf Stomper, by Bogs Footwear. It's made of rubber and is waterproof. I'd recommend it if you are an all-terrain kind of guy, or if the weather is not always pleasant.

>>13017030
>I also want to say that I love the design of these shoes.
According to pic related, they are called 'plain toe blucher'.

The whole or some part of the outfit is supposedly from the designer Dries van Noten, as indicated in the filename.

>>13017484
It is.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c7as0pFxPYc
>To understand the emergence of political correctness, social justice, modern feminism, etc., one must first understand the history of critical theory/Cultural Marxism.

>>13017777
>>13018401

if you wanna know about who changed the west, watch Century of The Self, docu by same guy who made HyperNormalisation, also recommended to watch

>>13019529
The Trap is really good too, basically watch everything Adam Curtis has made.