/lit/ - Literature

1. Get rid of earthly possessions
2. Become gay
3. Think, a lot

>>12683279
this

>>12683279
>>12683292
this

>>12683279
>>12683292
>>12683310
this

>>12683292
>>12683310
>>12683313
that

>>12683279
>>12683292
>>12683310
>>12683313
>>12683330
these

>>12683292
>>12683310
>>12683313
>>12683330
these

>>1268327
FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU

>>12683277
Learn a vocabulary of philosophical terms and a philosopher's name or two, then just intertwine them in sentences about other things. For this example I chose politics, and I wrote this in less than 10 mins. The less sense it makes the better and buzzwords are a big plus: Rawl’s choice to move to the original position is flawed for two equally important reasons.
Wittgensteinian Challenges to Distributive Justice, Identity Politics, and the Historical Perspective
The first is the challenge offered by Identity Politics; namely that historic inequality binds rational actors to detail-rich particulars of everyday life, and thus any position behind the veil of ignorance ignores rooted inequality.
The second is the more classic Wittgensteinian critique of the limits of our uses of language. There is no Archimedean point outside of the language game that empowers us with the methods to even accurately formulate a conception of an original position and a veil of ignorance in the first place.
The stratum of Identity Politics theorists that posit the reconstruction of a Rawlsian original position that takes into account historic inequality, in their haste to amend inequality make the same mistake of Rawls in attempting to ontologize a metaphysical position from which they can construct solutions to, or situational negations of, inequality.
It is equally impossible to entirely reject Rawl’s Archimedean point. Other Identity Politics thinkers who reject the project of amending a Rawlsian original position, are also ultimately at fault for basing their separatist-minded aims in the context of that which they originally rejected. In positing certainty of being in a perspective reactionarily historicized, they form a theory based on negation. This negation fails to find meaning within the language game without it’s reference to it’s original formulation from which it reacted from.
Thus, Rawls' original formulations are equally detrimental in their role as foundations in both strains of Identity Politics.
Accordingly, Rawls' theories can be said to have fundamentally changed the language game political theorists are engaged in. This change has led to dead ends in regards to theories which have been founded fundamentally by virtue of their critiques, restructuring, or rejection of Rawls.

>>12683279
>>12683292
>>12683310
>>12683313
>>12683330
>>12683334
>>12683336
this

None of the above.

>>12683279
>>12683292
>>12683310
>>12683313
>>12683330
>>12683334
>>12683336
>>12683365
this

All of the above
(including none of the above).

>>12683279
That

>>12683277
You know a good introduction to the Life of Socrates which is where Ancient Philosophy really starts is by the contemporary author Xenophon...he was a pupil of Socrates who later became a famous general who led a defeated Greek army home from Persia. You can find material on Socrates from Xenophon's books on him available in the public domain on the Gutenberg app...
As far as modern philosophers go they are really all Atheist and really all they are doing is promoting atheism so if you read one book you've really read them all..
I used to be into philosophy but I gave it up in favor of a more mystical means of truth by the practice, believe it or not, of what is called Dianic or Greenwood Wicca... But I still tell my Wicca friends to read Socrates....or any of the later Stoics...

>>12683277
I’d recommend starting with a text about the history of philosophy to start out with, to familiarize yourself with the subject. Bertrand Russell’s ‘A History of Western Phhilosophy’ is a bit old, and not reliable in certain sections, but it’s accessible and very readable. Will Durant’s is much the same, but again it only goes up to Nietzsche. For a more contemporary one, I’d recommend Kenny’s ‘A New History of Western Philosophy’.