/lit/ - Literature

Help a brainlet out. Did Wittgenstein really manage to dismiss the tradition of philosophy as irrelevant? Why? Because language prohibits us from arguing about things which can't be proven using scientific examination?

>philosophy is just a byproduct of misunderstanding language

holy fucking based

>why aren't you doing your logic homework anon? What is that you're reading?, Anti-Oedi-what? I already showed you through the principle of falsification that psychoanalysis is pseudo-scientific, now put that nonsense away and solve these proofs

>>11991516

Logic requires certain assumptions in order to function.

In the absence of logic, how are these axioms selected?

>>11922340
they both got served

a snacktatus logico-philosophicus

>>11914566
Wittgenstein ftw

>>11882534
Huhmmm, sweetie...

>>11879643
f u q

>>11869545
it's all just a game anon

Daily reminder that this autist disproved the viability of human-like AI and true robogfs are a goal you will never reach

>TFW too intelligent to convey thoughts.

Is Wittgenstein the biggest charlatan of the 20th century?

Because Deleuze was just a silly man talking sophistry, nonsense.

You’re in the classroom, showing off for your friends and that cutie you like in class, when this guy starts getting mad and hits you so hard you almost die. What do?

just nonsense

It's all nonsense.

>If a Lion could talk, we could not understand him.
Why? I'm struggling to think about this philosophy. If I listen to someone like John Carmack or a CERN mathematician, I don't know the intricacies of what they are talking about, but because I speak English and have the ability to infer meaning, I can get a rough idea of what they are talking about. Why wouldn't this be true with a lion? If he is speaking perfect English, with grammar and everything and isn't speaking in a jumbled mess of cognition - then why wouldn't we be able to infer what the lion meant?

>>11733503
Anti-realism is based. Based Wittgenstein and Georges Sorel

anyone aware of anywhere he writes about time or engages bergson

Mandatory

Why did he want to subvert the philosophical tradition by supposing it's steeped in misunderstanding?

"Schopenhauer has got quite a crude mind. Where real depth begins, his ends."
What did he mean by this?

*Beat kids in school*

I fucking hate words and their limitations, is this the guy for me? Where should I start?