Philosophy should, as far as possible, adhere to the methods

File: Screen Shot 2017-07-06 at 01.40.37.png (613KB, 1714x958px) Image search: [Google]

613KB, 1714x958px

Philosophy should, as far as possible, adhere to the methods and discourses of the natural sciences
Please formulate your ideas through logic and fake math
Don’t bother the public with your research or ideas, «public intellectuals» are unprofessional clowns
Russel and Wittgenstein are very smart pals
«Let’s produce some cool research about this object or discourse straight on, no need to consider how our epistemic or ontological access to said object/discourse is grounded in human subjectivity»
I’m not normative I’m doing research here
Let’s start with objectivity and understand ourselves from there

vs

Philosophy is a fundamentally separate discipline prior to natural science, let those nerds do their own thing
In fact, scientists are naive for not understanding how the knowledge they produce is dependent on human consciousness + particular historical and ideological power structures, and philosophers are stupid for attempting to mimic their methods
What’s the point of you can’t be critical?
I’d rather write a big nice book with beautiful prose than a boring ass journal article no one’s ever gonna read
Kant and Hegel are top pals
Let’s start with the subject and try to understand the world there


Pick a side /his