/lit/ - Literature

>>11804938
because analytic philosophy is so boring

>>11804938
analytic philosophy is interesting and studying it feels more productive than continental philsophy (in terms of you feel like you've grasped something, rather than just having an interpretation of something)

but its intellectual underpinnings are bogus and its infected with unreal levels of scientific hubris and ahistoricism

>>11804938
analytics is a kantian/hegelian cult dedicated to preserving its own existence

Because there is no hiding or obfuscating in analytic philosophy You either know your shit and can justify your assertions or you can't.

/lit/ is populated by semi-literate pseudo intellectuals who would prefer to hide behind the ambiguity of continental bullshit than be found out as dumb larpers who read Wikipedia and watch anime

>>11804938
Continental philosophy is easier to pretend to understand.

>>11805012
What is x in and of itself? First I will speak about an idea here, which as far as I know, has never occurred to anyone’s mind— we must have a new mythology; this mythology must, however, stand in the service of ideas, it must become a mythology of reason.

Until we make ideas aesthetic, i.e., mythological, they hold no interest for the people, and conversely, before mythology is reasonable, the philosopher must be ashamed of it. Thus finally the enlightened and unenlightened must shake hands; mythology must become philosophical, and the people reasonable, and philosophy must become mythological in order to make philosophy sensual. Then external unity will reign among us. Never again the contemptuous glance, never the blind trembling of the people before its wise men and priests. Only then does equal development of all powers await us, of the individual as well as if all individuals. No power will be suppressed any longer, then general freedom and equality of spirits will reign— A higher spirit sent from heaven must establish this religion among us, it will be the last work of the human race.

The same reason they love Jung and Freud but wont read a psychological textbook. The same reason they start with Euclid before they learn basic algebra.

>>11805022
he basically invented 'free will' here

correlationism

>>11805014
Excuse me, pic from your post is way too big for me to read comfortably, could you shrink it anymore to more compact size?

Parrots can talk and call everything they don't understand or are afraid of nonsense, it doesn't make them intelligent.

>>11805014

I think we underestimate the extent to which all philosophy in the past, as many occult and not so occult philosophers, including the hoary Leo Strauss, reveal, was, and perhaps still is, hidden behind a veil of secrecy. The truth is not for the uninitiated. It is too hard to stomach, therefore bread and circuses. The to ti en eina of Plato was preceded by the question of being, natural being, not the divine being, or the logos, and Heraclitus' logos was not reason. We philosophers have always been thoroughgoing materialists. Plato's Republic was meant as fodder for the citizens, not for the intellectuals who always knew better than to follow the vita activa when the vita contemplativa beckoned. The allegory of the cave is where the tares and wheat are sifted, those immersed in the spectacle and those who escape its dappled light for the truth where a single fire of the mind burns brightly. Continental philosophy is a sorry substitute for this pure skeptical reason. Ontology is a dirty word. Deleuze is the biggest charlatan of all. It's all just nonsense.

>>11805124
Analytic philosophy is clearer, more rigorous, and better with math and science, but only does a slightly better job of avoiding magical categories, language confusions, and non-natural hypotheses. Moreover, its central tool is intuition, and this displays a near-total ignorance of how brains work.

Bayesianism is the way forward.

continental is just mysticism, it's vulgar alchemy

>>11805157
>its central tool is intuition
What do the analytics mean when they say intuition?

>>11805232
They think the moon still exists without mathematical proof when it isn't out.

>>11805250
That’s an example of intuition what’s the definition?

>>11805303
The beginning of wisdom is to call things by their proper name.

>>11805323
That’s another example Euthyp-, I mean anon.

Bump

Analytic philosophy does not state any interesting fact about tge essential problems of life or how to solve them, instead it's a lot of analysing statements for logical validity. Which is dry and boring. Besides this it attempts to explain scientific findings about the mind by means of empirical research but does not dare postulate anything that seemingly questions or conradicts empirical findings by scientists, it abides strictly by its rules. It does not dare postulate anything out of the ordinarily accepted frameworks. That's why, according to me, analytic philosophy is totally useless.

>>11805157
Rationalism is in

Why does the world hate analytic philosophy*

Nobody outside the anglosphere ever wasted more than a minute on it.

why not have both at once

Reminder Goedel was big into Husserl.

Continental is more akin to reading literature, it's all about human experience. Analytical is just sterile and valueless

>>11805794
Man that one sokal paper rumper ruffled you pseuds for decades huh

>>11804938
Analytics smell like pencil shavings.

>>11805748
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFUCK YOOOOOOOOOOU YUDOWWSSSSSSKI

>>11805022
That happens regularly, we meme things and that provides an aestheticism to them, we use anime and that provides aestheticism to them, politics, religion etc. Those are the main forms of aestheticism and we attach them to reason already. It just needs to be more encompassing to the passions of humans and the mythic development of humans but we an aesthetics of reason already.

>>11804938
See >>11805014. Because they barely have any sense of what modern philosophy actually is and it's easier to LARP as being deep and reflective with half an understanding of edgy critiques of capitalism or society than it is to read and engage with serious, more advanced and ongoing debates about the nature of ethics, epistemology, mind, language, aesthetics or ontology and so on.

>inb4 analytics are soulless.
First actually read some and even if you still think that it doesn't outweigh the fact that it remains the best approach to dealing with some of the most fundamental categories of philosophical problems.

>>11806073
>First actually read some and even if you still think that it doesn't outweigh the fact that it remains the best approach to dealing with some of the most fundamental categories of philosophical problems.

I’ve read it anon. It’s soulless. It’s pedantic. It’s useless. Analytic philosophy is philosophy pretending to be math and science.

>>11804938
People would rather conclude that capital is sentient.

>>11805111
Why is this funny?

B ump

I don't read philosophers who lived after the 13th century so I don't know what the difference is but I'll bet it's stupid.

>>11805014

>>11805763
If only I could grasp it...i'd settle for grasping heidegger if I can concede never picking up whitehead

/lit/ is a Thomist board

The real answer is that /lit/ is full of pseuds who don't understand what they read. They claim to read Plato, Kant, Nietzsche etc., but cannot actually read Greek or German. Thus every thread is some variation of 'ipse dixit', without any precise practical criticism.

Analytic philosophy is most powerful when (dis)solving philosophical problems by exposing linguistic fallacies. However, this requires a close philological understanding of the original problem, which /lit/ does not possess. Thus it is no wonder that they do not appreciate analytic philosophy.

>>11809017
>Analytic philosophy is most powerful when (dis)solving philosophical problems by exposing linguistic fallacies
Most analytic philosophy is similarly rooted in its own form of linguistic fallacy, barring late Witty and maybe Davidson.

>>11804938
BECAUSE THEY ARE LITERALLY AUTISTIC. LIKE HOLY FUCK HAVE YOU READ THE AUFBAU OR JUST A SINGLE ESSAY OF AUSTIN OR DWORKIN OR GOD FORBID DAVID LEWIS. for real tho the only analyics worth their salt are quine and kripke, and their ground was covered by aristotle and plato, respectively, two thousand years ago

>>11806073
name me one goddam thing analytic philosophy has figured out? from my knowledge base, we have some stuff about intentionality and inflexion from the ordinary language guys, some stuff about essential properties from kripke which is some of the most self-evident stuff imaginable , and some stuff about the formal system itself thanks to higher order semantics and pragmatics. at the end of the day, this is not an impressive list for an entire tradition. literally the effect of stilted academics who cant see out of their own ass.

>>11805763
makes hegel, witt and deleuze look like easy reading

>>11805763
Someone needs to pull a Nick Land with this and put autism philosophy in the ground where it belongs.

Analytic philosophy is math lite.

>>11809359
Nick Land IS analytic

>>11804978
FPBP
It’s like reading an outdated science book and going through all the work But like a science book its theories are outdated and proven wrong.
Also fuck beady eyes anglos

Only non-philosophers believe in the analytic/continental distinction.

>>11804938
People here have pretty shitty lives, continental mysticism offers them some form of escape from it all.

>>11809837
This so much.

I begin by noticing that both names (continental and analytic) are inept: Wittgenstein, Carnap, Hempel, Frege himself are, duh! continental despite not being "continental". On the other hand, analytical philosophers properly speaking no longer exist, it is an anachronism to think that analytical philosophy aims to dissolve philosophical problems through linguistic analysis.

In a class on Kant in Oxford that I was fortunate enough to attend, Peter Strawson said half jokingly, about Hegel, that the only worthwhile is the Anglo-Saxon philosophy, that the rest are barbarities, he paused and He said, "Of course, the best Anglo-Saxon philosophers are Descartes, Kant and Wittgenstein." With this he wanted to indicate that it is not possible to trace an identity criterion for each "side" beyond the network of influences that have been woven historically.

>>11804938

>>11806071

From this, it seems like Rei can always retreat into her rational mind like Marcus Aurelius discusses.

>>11808937
Continental philosophy is Augustinian in terms of its acceptance of there being something out there beyond the limits of human comprehension and rationality, whereas analytic philosophy is stronger in terms of its Aquinian qualities in its search to have a proper, rational understanding of what we know for certain to exist.
Many /lit/fags may claim to have read Aquinas, but will rarely be able to say that they actually wish to understand the universe the same way Aquinas or Averroes did (which is by applying Aristotelian metaphysics and logical categories to objects and ideas which we know about).
As a matter of fact, I've seen a lot more Deleuze-influenced schizoposters or pedantic Hegel-readers than true Aquinians here.

>>11811479
Hegel is pretty strong against just that.

>>11804938
Brainlet here.
Explain to me what the differences are between Continental and Analytical philosophy

>>11811594
The heart of the analytic/Continental opposition is most evident in methodology, that is, in a focus on analysis or on synthesis. Analytic philosophers typically try to solve fairly delineated philosophical problems by reducing them to their parts and to the relations in which these parts stand. Continental philosophers typically address large questions in a synthetic or integrative way, and consider particular issues to be ‘parts of the larger unities’ and as properly understood and dealt with only when fitted into those unities.

Analytics believe its all just semantics and language, Continentals believe theories such as sentient AI from the future

>>11811594
analytics think philosophy ended with kant closing the book on metaphysics

>>11805014
Basically this. Anyone who takes Continential philosophy seriously has no ideas worth considering. It is pure sophistry, the most pseudointellectual of the pseudointellectual fields.

>>11811617
Deleuze destroyed analytical philosophy.

>>11811620
>destroyed
Confirmed for youtube clickbait sub-100 IQ brainlet

>>11804938
Because Continental philosophers deal more with the human condition and Analytic philosophers are interested in the world as it is understood logically or technically

>>11805802
Mostly because it's actual intention has been misinterpreted for decades

>hylic

everything else

>psychic

analytic

>pneumatic

continental, mysticism

Analytical philosophy is too abstract, I don't want my head in the clouds, I want it looking down at a woman sucking my cock. Hence why I read continental philosophy.

>>11811628
If that is true, then they are inferior in every way to good fiction writers. They don't advance the field of knowledge the way traditional philosophers (and now scientists) do. And unlike fiction writers, no one will ever read nor cite the turgid screeds they shit out twelve times a year.

>>11811620
Then how come analytic philosophy is still alive while Deleuze is dead?

>>11811594
analytics come from frege's logic and the science and math fetishisism of the marburg neo-kantians, which became vienna circle logical positivism and scientific empiricism, which then died when people realised that logic, science, and math aren't "objective" because all inquiry begins with presuppositions which are contained in language and culture, and logical positivism underwent a shabby "linguistic turn" to address this, and now analytic philosophers are a confused mishmash of shabby logicians and shabby linguisticians

continental philosophy is sort of the same, except instead of fixating on logic and getting held back by that for 40 years before realising logic exists within language and culture, they had their linguistic/cultural turn in the 1890s and have been doing far superior linguistic philosophy since then, roughly 70 years before the "analytics" figured it out

the division is mostly held together because british philosophers didn't like reading german and french philosophers from after the year 1750, so they called those "continentals." logical positivism was mostly big with brits, and only fizzled momentarily on the continent. britain had major influence over america, and american philosophy drew lots of its professors and intellectual life in general from british philosophy, so america was heavily "anglo-analytic" for a while, but around the analytic linguistic/postpositivist turn, america increasingly opened up to continental ideas. so now not only is analytic shit confined to a dying throwback generation that was already out of date in the 60s, they're mostly all british or commonwealth.

as this generation dies off, analytic philosophy is morphing into the "handmaiden" not of the sciences, as in the old positivist formulation, but of cognitive science, philosophy of engineering/application-oriented math, and related fields. analytic philosophy has been BTFO as bad philosophy for generations and generations, so now instead of finally dying they are consenting to be absorbed into the equally horrible and related philosophies underlying cogsci/AI development, which houses a lot of mechanist/materialist STEMfags who are naive realists and who get annoyed by linguistic/postpositivist philosophy because COME ON, MATTER IS JUST MATTER, IT'S AS SIMPLE AS THAT, STOP HARASSING ME WITH YOUR CONTINENTAL MUMBOJUMBO

analytics are now willing slaves to the endless hordes of asian statisticians who make algorithms so youtube can track your fart porn preferences

>>11811594
To put it in simple terms.

"Analytics" tend to accuse the "continentals" of incoherence or lack of meaning. Often for an "Analytic" the difference between a bad continental philosopher and a good continental philosopher is which of the following two judgments we apply: 1.- "90% of what he says does not make sense and the other 10% is obvious" and 2. - "90% of what he says does not make sense and the other 10% is interesting". The other perspective is missing: The Continentals tend to accuse "Analytics" of being innocent, of presupposing what we have to rethink.

>>11805014
yall got any more pixels in dis bich

>>11805014
>Antalytics

Analytics a shit. A SHIT

>>11811703
What are some examples of continental linguistics/philosophy of language?