PhD Candidate in Philosophy here, ask me anything! So, I'm

Can you explain Plato's Forms?

What was Nietzsche's problem with Christianity?

>>8042280
analytic or continental

>>8042280
Why are you wasting your one life?

Please explain Berkeley's idealism

Please explain what happened in the debate about Naturwissenschaften and Geisteswissenschaften after Dilthey

Let A and B be Lebesgue measurable sets of finite non-zero measure. Let
ϕ(x) = |A ∩ (B + x)| where absolute value denotes Lebesgue measure and
B + x = {y : y = b + x for some b ∈ B}. Prove or give a counterexample:
ϕ(x) is continuous.

>>8042280
Would love a list of interesting contemporary philosophers.

>>8042280
What do I have in my pocket?

>>8042299
lel you realize the fact he's doing a PhD means 99% of the time he's only reading a tiny select pool of autistic weirdos in his autistic weirdo specialty. He doesn't know shit about whats going on in philosophy in general even if he's legit

>>8042315
No. I have faith in our friend. He discusses a broad range of intellectual topics with elite gentlemen and smoking babes.

File: nyeees.png (205KB, 1000x800px) Image search: [Google]

205KB, 1000x800px

>>8042280
Does God real?

>>8042290
Not sure this is a significant or meaningful distinction. I work in history of philosophy and metaphysics. Every decent department is primarily 'analytic', although again it's hard to see that as a term that means much.

>>8042291
I guess I didn't know I was

>>8042296
Primary qualities are also essentially manifest properties. And I don't work on hermeneutics

>>8042298
I know the mathematics you need to know to prove soundness and completeness + have a basic understanding of incompleteness. You know, enough set theory to do basic model theory stuff, and know a decent amount of logic. But I don't know this.

>>8042299
I think the most interesting philosophers working today are probably:
Michael Thompson
Sebastian Rödl
Kit Fine
John MacFarlane
Richard Moran
Jonathan Lear
Nomy Arpaly
Robert Pippin
Sam Scheffler
Michael Della Rocca
Huw Price
Mark Wilson

I dunno, it depends what you are interested in. But these people all do great work, much of which is of general interest.

>>8042311
A bit of string?

>>8042367
this is not OP

>>8042280
I really want to study Philosophy too, i think its really fun, way more fun than math. But the problem is the jobs, what can i work as with a phd? will i become a potato farmer?

>>8042368
You don't know enough real analysis for me to consider you a likeable person.

>>8042384
The job market is bad, but there are jobs. And a phd in philosophy can be more versatile then you might think.

Plus you can always just be an academic administrator.

>>8042394
what the hell does that mean

>>8042391
that's okay with me.

>>8042315
I mean there is a bit of truth to what you say, but anyone getting a phd who is the least bit competent knows a great deal about what is going on in the field in general. it's kind of expected of you.

>>8042391
You don't know enough real analysis for me to consider you a person.

>>8042290
>in the United States
you think US is not a cesspool of dirty analytics?

>>8042402
I'm not sure how what I wrote is confusing at all. The academic job market is bad, but most people from my department are getting jobs eventually. Just more years on the market + post docs/VAP positions etc are the norm.

>>8042409
again, analytic v continental is not a very useful distinction, but pretty much every country does 'analytic' philosophy.

File: 1461947716814.jpg (93KB, 620x670px) Image search: [Google]

93KB, 620x670px

>>8042280
>philosophy in the United States

>>8042391
The mathematics he engages in, i.e. Logic, is far more fundamental, intricate, and complex than undergraduate real analysis; so the superiority that you presumably feel over OP isn't really justified.

Mathematicians, in contrast to logicians, are well known to have a poor grasp of Logic.

>>8042407
What kind of standard is that? To me, if you haven't worked through Rudin's Real and Complex Analysis then you are unworthy to speak to me. I still consider human beings to be human beings because human beings are biologically human beings, as I have read in journals.

>>8042394
While getting the philo degree, can you take on writing or major anything else meanwhile?

>>8042416
I think the general consensus is that the US has the best philosophy departments in the world. There are other great departments--oxford, cambridge, St. Andrews/Stirling, Toronto, Humboldt, LMU-Munich, ANU etc. But philosophy in the US is in pretty good shape.

>>8042434
It's a PhD, its pretty much full time work. I'm either teaching or doing my own stuff. But you can, if you have the time. You can study whatever you like.

>>8042439
t. American

>>8042439
He thought you meant you were studying American Philosophy specifically.

>>8042439
To be this deluded

>>8042449
Are you serious?

>>8042455
Are you deluded too?

>>8042280
What is continental philosophy so bad?

>>8042465
I'm OP. People who complain about philosophy in the united states generally fall into two camps: (1) people who know nothing about philosophy, and (2) people who are upset that their little pet interest (and here it is usually heidegger and french deconstructionist bullshit) doesn't entirely dominate the field. These people know about as much philosophy as the first group, but are significantly more annoying.

>>8042455
You seriously expect a board full of pseudo-bibliophilic man children to ask you any remotely stimulating questions lmao

>>8042472
It isn't in general. It does attract a lot of people who don't know much philosophy and have annoying rhetorical flourishes they use to disguise this, but there is quite good stuff that gets labelled 'continental philosophy'.

>>8042481
What are your opinions on Stirner's philosophy?

>>8042482
I dunno, maybe. Mostly I am just doing this to put off grading papers.

>>8042439
>departments
>good

>>8042481
There's literally nothing wrong with Derrida.

Have you read Of Grammatology?

>>8042503
Please say a bit more about this.

>>8042496
I know nothing about it.

File: come at me.png (825KB, 1364x698px) Image search: [Google]

825KB, 1364x698px

>>8042280
>>8042364
Answer my question, you whore.

>>8042513
>I know nothing about it.
Thanks for being honest. Most people on this board will just spew nonsense or rant about it.

>>8042510
Well, I've read one essay of his I quite liked (Plato's pharmacy), and have read bits and pieces of of grammatology, specters of marx, maybe a bit more. I find his writing to be fairly obnoxious, and it is clear that his influence has been a fairly negative one, but there are people I know well who are good philosophers who find worthwhile things in him.

I was just saying that there are a small faction of people who read everything through Heidegger + Derrida and complain about their marginalization within the profession. They have a handful of departments, but thankfully exert little influence in the field.

>>8042368
>I guess I didn't know I was

well, you are.
you know you're a disappointment to your parents.
why don't you do something more useful instead?
like work in a shop or something

>>8042482
>Coming onto 4chan to have serious discussions

look at this butthurt anal(lytic) faggotini

>>8042532
Why do you think that is? What I mean is that, Heidegger is considered by many the most important philosopher of the 20th century, so why does he not have much academic clout among academic departments?

>>8042368
> I work in history of philosophy and metaphysics

What period/philosophers do you work on?
What do you think about the grounding literature?

Started your dissertation yet?

>>8042547
There are people who work on Heidegger in many top departments--NYU, Columbia, Harvard, Georgetown, Chicago, Berkeley, for example. But Heidegger's originality and importance is contested even by people who work on hermeneutics. Michael Forster, for example, who is probably the leading person who works in that area, finds him to be fairly derivative. But my general point is that even if he is a great philosopher a department needs to cover ancient, early modern, kant, medieval, plus logic, metaphysics, epistemology, ethics, political philosophy, philosophy of language etc. Maybe even a bit of non-western philosophy (although this is really rare). Why should everyone be working on Heidegger?

>>8042547
Because he's not an analytic

OP is trying to blur the lines, oh it doesn't matter, there's no divide, it's the same thing etc.

He has enormous clout with people that know, they're often not ones to be in charge of depts. do you think OP has any motive in criticising the ground he stands on? He literally came on here to satisfy his vanity

>>8042568
Late Medieval and early modern. I generally think it is a positive direction for metaphysics, and there is a lot of interesting stuff there. And yes, I've started my dissertation

>>8042583
>Because he's not an analytic
This is not the answer.

And I did offer some reasons, here>>8042572

>>8042583
>He has enormous clout with people that know,
Yeah, this is not true. He has many fans, but plenty of people know heidegger well and don't have a high opinion of him.

>>8042572
This is probably just because I'm a retard who knows nothing about professional philosophy, but why is it that philosophers who have been largely discredited by contemporaneity, are still the subject of serious academic study and research. For example, physicists no longer study the theories of Bohr and Planck

>>8042604
I don't think you understand my point. There are a lot of people you can disagree and have quibbles with (essentially how deluded analytics lead each other in circles day in day out) but there are others, ones when you disagree with you just reveal yourself to be a retard, because you're disagreeing with "being". Most analytics are borderline autists at best and they inherently don't get "being", and the hate they get is deserved.

>>8042604
Could you expand on why those who know Heidegger well don't think highly of him? I noticed you said some consider him derivative, but what do you mean by this? Any other criticisms?

>>8042624
History is a crucial element of Philosophy, moreso than in other fields. You generally do need to "start from the Greeks", because everything lese will ve in dialogue with them. For the same reason the Rationalists, Empricists, and Kant are crucial.

>>8042624
I don't know of any philosophers who have been 'refuted' or superseded in the same way that past scientists have. And there are plenty of people who study the history of physics, they just put them in different departments.

But also because philosophy is not a normal science, and it doesn't make progress by discrediting previous philosophers.

>>8042627
So people not having a high opinion of Heidggeder is a red flag of red flags. It basically says this fucking person is some kind of autist, raw intelligence caught in knots. Doubly so if they hold any academic position, those are literally dead people walking.

>>8042591
Cool, and good luck!
Was there any difficulty in transitioning from doing coursework and stuff to working on a dissertation?

>>8042627
You are clearly the sort of idiot who knows little about philosophy I had in mind. People who don't think highly of heidegger are 'analytics' and disagree with being, huh? This is rather pathetic.

>>8042624
None of them have been discredited, that's not how it works.
>physicists no longer study the theories of Bohr and Planck
Because mental masturbation.

>>8042640
This is a pretty embarrassing display. But, as I said above, the party-line heideggerians who know nothing of philosophy are both sad and annoying. And all this railing against analytics! How cute.

File: zizek.png (114KB, 594x447px) Image search: [Google]

114KB, 594x447px

>>8042280
What do you think of these departments:
Michigan
Duke
Penn
Brown

Why isn't there greater research done in aesthetics? Is it not as respected or popular as mind or language?

What are your thoughts on critical theory/cultural studies?

have you read much donald davidson?
if so, what is your opinion of his work especially with regard to anomalous monism? do you see any ethical ramifications in this theory?

>>8042651
Who still considers Aquinas' theological proofs legitimate?

>>8042641
Thank you! I did find it challenging, I had some issues with supervisors and had to change topics once, but not everyone has a hard time. Particularly if you are one of those people who write the three papers dissertation--they seem to have an easier go at it.

>>8042661
This is the divide I'm talking about you sperg :3

>>8042671
Cuckolics all think they're legit because he's a saint and it would break their minds for him to be wrong.

Provincial pigeonhole faggot detected

How does it feel knowing that I know more about your field and specialty when I'm in a totally different one? Pleb

>>8042673
could you answer this anon's question, OP? I'm interested as well >>8042635

>>8042665
All of this depends on what you are interested in. Michigan is an exceptionally good department, Brown is a strong department with good coverage in ethics/moral psych and kant and post-kantian european philosophy. Duke is okay, not terribly interesting in my opinion. Penn has had a rough 5 years or so, and is not very strong at the moment. They still have some good people though, and I think they are trying to rebuild.

I'm not sure there isa good reason there isn't more research in aesthetics, honestly. What is popular isn't always popular because it is the most interesting work.

And I'm a fan of critical theory in general (if we are talking frankfurst school stuff). I don't really know what 'cultural studies' means, honestly.

File: 3kj4iDZv.jpg (99KB, 1024x1024px) Image search: [Google]

99KB, 1024x1024px

>>8042676
s m h y'oull cowards don't even habe F A I T H

>>8042683
>>8042635

Heidegger's view that understanding meaning, and possessing language, are fundamental to the manner of existence of Dasein just repeats thoughts found in herder and hegel. Same with his notion of fore-understanding and the manner in which our active engagement with the world is more fundamental than our speculative contemplation of it. Not much new.

>>8042691
I think we finally made him leave

>>8042714
>Same with his notion of fore-understanding and the manner in which our active engagement with the world is more fundamental than our speculative contemplation of it

That's Hegel alright.

>>8042718
still here>>8042721
Herder, faggot

>>8042714
What a fucking retard you are. This is the embarrassing display if there was one. You're actually studying philosophy full time and this is what you come up with.

>nothin new
critique of Shakespeare ... Nothing new Chaucer did similar things

Kill yourself OP for all that is true and just

>>8042741
I was asked why some people who work on hermeneutics might find heidegger derivative. I don't work on hermeneutics, and I like heidegger, but i answered the question. Is there anything wrong with my answer?

Why are you so angry anon?

What is your favorite work of literature?

>>8042671
how are they illegitimate?

>>8042780
Lookout Cartridge by Joseph McElroy
Through the Valley of the Nest of Spiders by Sam Delaney
The Magus by John Fowles
Aberration of Starlight by Gilbert Sorrentino
The Ghost Writer by Phillip Roth

>>8042782
Let's look at the first one, the argument from motion:
> Our senses prove that some things are in motion.

Not necessarily true. Motion is a physical manifestation of the human tendency to perceive things in a causal manner.

> Things move when potential motion becomes actual motion.

ok.

> Only an actual motion can convert a potential motion into an actual motion.

This is like saying 'only a man can convert a baby into a man.' It assumes a priori existence of the thing become, which completely undermines Aquinas' notion of a prime mover, in which the mover is in existence before the moved.

> Nothing can be at once in both actuality and potentiality in the same respect (i.e., if both actual and potential, it is actual in one respect and potential in another).

Fine.

> Therefore nothing can move itself.

Semantically spurious. Consider a human moving. He both moves himself in one framing of man as the subject, and is also moved by his neural impulses which are generated from external stimuli in another framing.

> Therefore each thing in motion is moved by something else.

See previous point.

> The sequence of motion cannot extend ad infinitum.

In a causal framework, which is not necessarily how the world works.

> Therefore it is necessary to arrive at a first mover, put in motion by no other; and this everyone understands to be God.

Assuming Aquinas' former premises, the prime mover would also have to be an object capable of motion, which necessarily inserts it into the framework of causality, which in turn necessitates that it has the potential to be acted on by another object. Aquinas fails to break the infinity of causal relations and instead makes a logical leap in the conclusion toward a god figure that does not follow from his premises

>>8042888
Just want to say that this is NOT op.

>>8042714

>Not much new

Bro this is literally your entire field, there is nothing new in philosophy. University / academic philosophy studies are a huge circle jerk of fedora-tier lefties that enjoy wasting time.

>>8042384

For gods sake choose anything else. You can read philosophy on your time and skip wasting 100k on a degree proving you read the texts.

At least go to university for a field that can actually grow and evolve. I'd recommend literature, history or even divinity school.... and that's coming from a STEM major that's going into medicine.

>>8042921
>. University / academic philosophy studies are a huge circle jerk of fedora-tier lefties that enjoy wasting time.

Back to /pol/.

ALSO I WAS ANSWERING A FUCKING QUESTION. The question was: why would people who work on hermeneutics be less than impressed with heidegger and think his work is somewhat derivative. I think I answered the question, although a few people have complained about it.

also you are a fucking moron.

>>8042865
Are you a homosexual Jew by any chance?

>>8042930
>back to /pol/
>also you are a fucking moron.

This is the level of banter I expected from a "Phd philosophy" student.

>>8042939
k

>>8042937
nope

>>8042912
What makes you say that?

ITT: OP is getting mad and showing his colors

Should I major in English or Computer Science at my state school?

>>8042280
Ignoring your reddit-tier replies, your first post makes it painfully obvious you found this place through /r/4chan.

>>8042944
>Motion is a physical manifestation of the human tendency to perceive things in a causal manner.

I didn't want to be associated with this thought.

shoulve used a trip, dumb fucking reddit op nigger with a cuck baby

>>8042952
Can you tell me why you think this? It isn't true, not that this means much.

>>8042955
What's wrong with it?

File: 1365475090228.jpg (418KB, 747x1417px) Image search: [Google]

418KB, 747x1417px

What's better:

Majoring in STEM at a state school or majoring in humanities at an Ivy/Stanford/Top tier schools

>>8042950

He's slowly realizing that philosophy is the lowest tier of academic fields out there at the moment. It's a bitter pill to swallow but best that he takes it now.

What do you lads think: philosophy, anthropology or sociology... all bottom of the barrel or is one of the true king of shit degrees?

>>8042971
anthro for sure

The Heidegger autist in this thread is a fucking retard. Heidegger is a nonentity in philosophy.

>>8042971
Soft social 'sciences' like sociology are worthless junk fields that should be abolished. To compare them to philosophy is absurd.

>>8042970
Humanities at the top school for sure. State school proles need to know their place.

>>8042992
Oh, the elitism...

>>8042888
'not found of its presumptions' is not 'illegitimate'
>>8042970
Top schools aren't better than state schools quality-wise, they just have more dosh

>>8042280
how'd you pick your grad school? how many places did you apply to?

>>1140241

To sum up from the start: The Munchhausen trilemma shows that everything is based on axioms and deductions, circular logic, or infinite regression logic. Ignoring the latter two, anyone can pick any axioms they want for anything. "Murder is wrong" "Murder is great"

So why do institutions shit on non mainstream axioms? If I wanted to write about the aesthetics of jelly doughnuts then they'd tell me that I'm stupid. If someone wants to wank over the is-ought problem (which has no solution, obviously), they think that's great.

And add in shitloads if obscurantism, pseudo intellectual worship of philosophical figures, etc and that's philosophy in a nutshell. Pseudo intellectual posturing that cannot tell us anything new or anything that was not already obvious to regular people. Within the infinite space of unfalsifiable reasoning, institutions and pseudo intellectuals on his and lit and everywhere will ravage anyone who engages in non mainstream unfalsifiable reasoning.

>>8042965
>Motion is a physical manifestation of the human tendency to perceive things in a causal manner.
Because it is pants-on retarded (it is vaguely phrased as are his other replies). Motion is a fundamental, and so independent of the human mind, property, of objects that are capable of standing in causal relations. Any empirical object is such an object; and since everything boils down to subatomic particles, we only need to consider them.

Should I be reading someone writing about philosophers/philosophy to start off, like Russell's History or those very short intro things, or should I just start with the bloody greeks and all their weird math looking stuff?

>>8043013
I applied to 8 places, got into 6 of them. Visited four places, picked based off of overall department strength + strength in my specialty (which changed) + funding package + where my wife wanted to live.

>>8043027
You do realize your wife is cheating on you, right?

She's only marrying you for your money and is secretly taking alpha cock in her ass.

>>8043023
Certainly not Russell's history, for the love of god. The intro's range in quality a great deal. Really it depends on your interests, but nothing is going to beat or replace reading the texts themselves.

>>8043030
of course.

>>8043030
>money from a philosophy student

>>8043015
weren't you posting this autistic garbage about axioms etc on other threads? what is wrong with you?

>>8043033

Gravy, thanks, mate.

>>8043015
The problem with the Muchhausen Trilemma (aka /lit/s meme of the week) is that it doesnt explain why circular reasoning or infinite regresses are necessarily bad. It just takes it for granted.

>>8043060
Why are people on this board not referring to it as the Agrippan Trilemma?

>>8043037
>>8043039
Once a cuck, always a cuck.

>>8043071
Is this one of those dreaded AXIOMS of philosophy I've heard about?

>>>/his/1140065

OP, look at this topic.

>tfw rejected from princeton but accepted to yale
>ended going to state school because poor

>>8043082
I'm so sick of 4chan trying to discuss philosophy, it just tires me.

>>8043095
lol ya

>>8043082
that's crazy. i thought that was just a history board?

>>8043000
You say that like it's a bad thing or incorrect.

>>8043092
for what?

>>8043095
This was the post I needed rn.
Later gators.

>>8043139
computer science

>>8043165
cool. you probably made a good decision.

Any interesting work on aprioristic ethics you could hook me up with?

>>8043206
>aprioristic ethics

Can you tell me what sort of thing you have in mind here? I like to think I can recommend something, but I'm not entirely sure what sort of thing you are looking for

>>8043180
Yeah, it just sucks that I'll never have the bragging rights to say that I graduated from Yale. Instead, I have to say I have a Comp Sci degree from Arizona State. Sucks to be poor.

Are Habermas and the Frankfurt school the only way humanity will ever succeed?

>>8043226
no, and I think its a bit late for humanity to succeed.

>>8043237

We are living in the most peaceful period in all of human history.

>>8043244
Okay steven pinker. Anyway, we are doing and have done far too much damage to the environment, and we as a species seem incapable of stopping or even slowing down. So I don't think we will have an inhabitable planet for too much longer. And i think once parts of the planet become totally uninhabitable (the middle east, for example), this period of peace (such as it is) will come to a quick end.

>>8043259
What do you think of deep ecology?

>>8043259

That's a fair crack, mate. Although I suppose the impending end of the world doesn't mean much if there is no hereafter anyway.

Do your studies help you with that whole inherent pointlessness thing?

OP is such a self-important faggot it's nauseating.

>Comes on 4chan to do a le AMA xD
>Acts like a butthurt bitch when people on here act exactly like they always do

>>8043259
Lol don't quit your day job Nostradamus

>>8043273
I really dont know too much about it. can you tell me anything?

>>8043278
I hope I am somewhat polite, although not always. Don't really think philosophy has helped.

>>8043283
Okay. Not sure how I was getting upset. I pointed out when some idiots were acting like idiots, but I wasn't upset.

>>8043288
I wasn't planning on it. I take it you disagree with what I said?

>>8043306
>Back to /pol/.
>ALSO I WAS ANSWERING A FUCKING QUESTION. The question was: why would people who work on hermeneutics be less than impressed with heidegger and think his work is somewhat derivative. I think I answered the question, although a few people have complained about it.
>also you are a fucking moron.


Yeah dude you're super chill

>>8043321

yup

>>8043306
Here's the summary from wiki

Proponents of deep ecology believe that the world does not exist as a resource to be freely exploited by humans. The ethics of deep ecology hold that the survival of any part is dependent upon the well-being of the whole. Proponents of deep ecology offer an eight-tier platform to elucidate their claims:

>The well-being and flourishing of human and nonhuman life on Earth have value in themselves (synonyms: intrinsic value, inherent value). These values are independent of the usefulness of the nonhuman world for human purposes.

>Richness and diversity of life forms contribute to the realization of these values and are also values in themselves.

>Humans have no right to reduce this richness and diversity except to satisfy vital human needs.

>The flourishing of human life and cultures is compatible with a substantial decrease of the human population. The flourishing of nonhuman life requires such a decrease.

>Present human interference with the nonhuman world is excessive, and the situation is rapidly worsening.

>Policies must therefore be changed. These policies affect basic economic, technological, and ideological structures. The resulting state of affairs will be deeply different from the present.

>The ideological change is mainly that of appreciating life quality (dwelling in situations of inherent value) rather than adhering to an increasingly higher standard of living. There will be a profound awareness of the difference between big and great.

>Those who subscribe to the foregoing points have an obligation directly or indirectly to try to implement the necessary changes.

These principles can be refined down into three simple propositions:

>Wilderness and biodiversity preservation
>Human population control
>Simple living (or treading lightly on the planet)

>>8043311
It was about as insightful as a potato but was phrased like it was actually saying anything at all.

>>8043329
How is this any different from mainstream ecology?

>>8043326
Socrates, everybody

>>8043329

Not sure I agree with everything here, but it seems generally on the right track.

>>8043337
thanks for the criticism.

>>8043342
I guess it's the ethics derived from scientific ecology.

>>8043356
I don't see any ethics though, it's just the same "respect nature" tagline we see on Starbucks cups, no actions are prescribed that veer from the standard Ideology on the subject

Reminder that OP has been here for like 4 straight hours doing a r/AMA when he could have been working on his precious dissertation. How intellectually disingenuous.

>Inb4 terse smug sarcastic response

>>8043368
CONFIRMED FOR BEING ZIZEK MEMESTER

>>8043368
i mean you seem a bit silly. it's clear this is some sort of very programmatic thing, do you expect directions re: how many hours a day you can have lights on or something?

What's your opinion on postmodernism? Are they just a poor man's version of Nietzsche?

>>8043372
oh god you are right!

>>8043368
It can get quite edgy

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentti_Linkola

>He advocates eugenics, genocide, and abortion as possible means to combat overpopulation.

>>8043391
Uhh I was in b4 this response dummy

>>8043283
Precisely this

Doing an AMA on 4chan is begging for abuse and deserving every bit of it. There are few cases as clean cut as this.

>>8043397
well this is not surprising, but it is pretty gross.

>>8043380
Yes because I'm saying it's masquerading as something radical when its just a naive positivist response to an externality not taking into account what is stopping us from making moderate change in its direction now.

>>8043379
*sniff*

>>8043415

another victim of theory, i see.

>>8043423
Of course, but at least I'm aware of it

>>8043441
Sad! it's not philosophy, it's not politics, it's just bullshit entertainment. But at least you learn how to parrot a bit of jargon and feel like a real radical intellectual, huh?

>>8043441
it is fun tho. what kind of stuff do you like to read apart from zizek?

I'm planning on doing a PhD in English and I'm currently a year from finishing my undergraduate degree - what were you doing, preparation-wise, around this time?

>>8043524
Just working my ass off, reading everything I could, getting to know faculty really well. And also enjoying it, which is the point.

Took a year off in between and applied after I graduated. I recommend this. Didn't worry about a writing sample until the year after I graduated. Applying sucked, but really don't be too stressed about it.

>>8043494
Ah I'm barely even sure really, in fiction lately I've been looking a lot at Kafka, Conrad and Dostoevsky.

>>8042930
As a phil undergrad, you're an emarrassment. The fact that any philosophy major would think "back to (place I don't like)" is an acceptable argument is fucking tragic. Kill yourself faggot

>>8043558
lol

>>8043547
good stuff

>>8042971
Nigger don't throw philosophy down the well because of this dumbfuck. If you actually listen, internalize and understand it, philosophy is top tier

>/lit/ always complains about the lack of expert opinions on /lit/
>philosopher PhD student shows up
>"ASK ME ANYTHING! ANYTHING AT ALL! I AM HERE!"
>within 5 minutes he shows himself to be a total fucking dilettante
>everyone laughing at him

Hahahahaha

>>8043570
>within 5 minutes he shows himself to be a total fucking dilettante

it's just that people like you get upset when you encounter someone who actually knows what he is talking about. there have been some okay people here, a few moronic heidegger obsessives, not very interesting.

>>8043585
Enjoy your dissertation on the metaphysical implications of Malebranche's tampon experiment you fucking retard faggot. No one will ever read it, and when you try applying for jobs they will go "so what can you teach?" and you'll reply "I'm a huge retard dilettante!" just like you did in this thread, and after two years of trying to raise your ugly kid on a postdoc's wage, your fat girlfriend will leave you and you'll give up and get a job in the private sector, but you'll keep talking about your failed academic ambitions to anyone who will listen while you get old and eventually die alone. Make a good thread next time, you piece of shit. Read a book.

>>8043602
>Enjoy your dissertation on the metaphysical implications of Malebranche's tampon experiment you fucking retard faggot. No one will ever read it, and when you try applying for jobs they will go "so what can you teach?" and you'll reply "I'm a huge retard dilettante!" just like you did in this thread, and after two years of trying to raise your ugly kid on a postdoc's wage, your fat girlfriend will leave you and you'll give up and get a job in the private sector, but you'll keep talking about your failed academic ambitions to anyone who will listen while you get old and eventually die alone. Make a good thread next time, you piece of shit. Read a book.
what did he mean by this?

>>8043570
Where did he show himself to be a dilettante? Which posts?

Would I get bum fucked if I did my dissertation on De Selby?

>>8042668
Pls answer my question op

>>8043602
You're importing a whole lot of irrelevant issues with this post, anon. Get a grip.

>>8042280
refute Antinatalism

>>8043635
I can afford to import things because I didn't get a useless PhD in a subject I suck at from a state school lmfao. Enjoy domestic, future postdoc slave. Enjoy being a TA at 36. Yo for real link me your academia.edu so I can read all the things you write in scholarly idiom that remain unpublished forever dude. I want to hear your hot opinions. Dilettante bitch.

>>8043646
>we have a duty to minimise suffering

Dropped right there

i want to get into logic so i can later move on to model theory, what should i read?
A list would be nice.

>>8043540
Thanks for your response, sounds like I'm on the right track then. Whether to take a year off was going to be my next question so thanks for that too!

>>8043666
why? Is there something more worthwhile than reducing suffering?

>>8043624
What's a De Selby

>>8043634
Sorry, I didn't see it. Yes, I've read a decent amount of Davidson. I'm not sure what the ethical implications of anomalous monism could be--it's a thesis about the metaphysics of psychological states, the possibility of reducing pscyhology to physics, and the nature of rational explanation.

>>8043657
i don't go to a state school anon :(

>>8043670
you should work through boolos et als computability and logic.

hodges a shorter model theory is the book i've seen recommended most.

>>8043684
>What's a De Selby
Philosopher in some Flann O'Brien novels.

>>8043681
Yeah, getting my babyjuice in a woman

>>8043694

Worth reading?

>>8043695
Not even wrong

>>8043657
You're doing it again.

>>8043692
And what if i have no previous experience with philosophy?

>>8043713
or logic? what is your mathematics background? and why are you interested in model theory?

>>8043646
Antinatalism is a cult of decadent practicality. Its the Just World theory cranked up to 11.

>>8043702
Absolutely.

>>8043023
Just read Plato my dude. Its not really "weird math stuff", I was surprised by how engaging and poetic it is.

ITT: some anons who are buttmad about op because ... ?

>>8043720
Yes, no experience in either philosophy or logic.
Math background is non-existent.

>>8042280

When you take my order, can you not put lettuce in my burger?

Seriously - Which contemporary non-marxist philosophers will be well-regarded in the distant future? It seems that every non-marxist philosopher today is making little to no contribution to the field.

>>8043768
The why the fuck are you interested in Model Theory? You don't even know what it is.

>>8043768
oh, then I am really confused why you would think you might be interested in model theory.

so you'll want an introduction to logic textbook to work through. i think warren goldfarb's deductive logic book is a good place to start.

>>8043784
"non marxist" - WTF? Do you even know what philosophy is?

>>8042298
This is REAL philosophy. OP confirmed pseud heheh.

>>8043789
>>8043790
I-it sounded interesting

>>8043817
okay, i don't mean to be discouraging. it's just surprising that someone without a math/logic or philosophy background would decide they wanted to study model theory. but its a good goal, so go for it.

>>8043602
>and after two years of trying to raise your ugly kid on a postdoc's wage, your fat girlfriend will leave you and you'll give up and get a job in the private sector, but you'll keep talking about your failed academic ambitions to anyone who will listen while you get old and eventually die alone.

This is almost certainly true OP.

>>8043880
postdoc's pay pretty well tho

>>8043817
Start here: http://www.logicmatters.net/tyl/

He tells you all you need to go from baby logic to model theory and beyond.

>>8043896
Wow, thanks

>>8042280
Get the fuck out of here! Analytics not welcome!

Is a realist answer the best one when it comes to the problem of universals?

What do you think of Aristotelian philosophy and the thinkers who he inspired? I have read that the loss of Aristotle as a center point was the key to a lot of the problems we are having socially today.

Are you religious?

what do you think of judith butler op

what's the point in the analytic philosophy when logic and linguistic exists

>>8042888
God made the rules numbnuts. Aquinas is describing god as the first cause or creator of causes. His ideas on motion still hold up. What moves without something else causing it to move?

Many of the ancients had critically flawed ideas of physical matters, but others were pretty close given that they were essentially looking at the world and trying to order it using logic, and if you use their reasoning with assumptions updated by modern science there is still to learn from Aquinas and Aristotle.

>>8043721
how is Antinatalism related to the Just world fallacy?

>ctrl+f "finance", find nothing

How do you finance you studies, OP? If scholarships, are they hard to get? Is it hard for foreigners to get into (good) American PhD programmes?

>>8043068
Because they read about it on wikipedia

>>8045050
Not the OP, but financing is not an issue. Admission comes down to writing sample, GPA, GRE score, and references. Don't even bother applying outside the top 20 programs listed here:
http://www.philosophicalgourmet.com/overall.asp
... unless you have very niche interests.

>>8045085
Forgot to mention: the reason financing is not an issue is that any reputable program will give you a tuition waver plus annual stipend. Avoid any program that charges money - it's a scam.

File: 117323381.jpg (82KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 1000x1000px

>>8045097
>>8045085

Thank you.

>>8044368
not a huge fan

>>8044374
ok

>>8045050
this anon>>8045085
>>8045097
is right

and it depends what country you are coming from. if little is known about what your background and education consists of you may have a harder time unfortunately. that being said there are tons of people from all over the world at top us departments.

>>8042970
Humanities at a higher university, if you have the ability to get to a top university you'd be better off going and studying there than at a state school.

>>8042991

I study Urbanism/Spatial Planning, social sciences make fantastic applications of theory

>>8043244
Only in the sense of living in a unipolar world fosters the war of all against all. If you think this is the "end of history", you are in for a rude awakening

>>8043619
He's chill with his wife cucking him

>>8045244
>social sciences make fantastic applications of theory

this is one of the saddest sentences i have ever read

>>8045255
oh you!

>>8042676
>>8042691
You tell him lad. Have faith or LEAVE

>>8043568
This

>>8045285
this

>>8043602
Don't listen to this cunt OP.
He seems to be reflecting back on his own life.

>>8045287
Also this

>>8045334
This

>>8042951
Double major in both

What do you think of Nietzsche OP?

>>8045559
Amazing philosopher. Not really my cup of tea (I don't go much for naturalists), but great fun to read. Lots of good work being done on him these days.

>>8045500
/thread

What are your opinions on these courses:

https://www.coursera.org/learn/philosophy/
https://www.coursera.org/learn/plato/home/welcome
https://www.coursera.org/learn/aristotle/home/welcome
https://www.coursera.org/learn/modern-postmodern-1/home/welcome
https://www.coursera.org/learn/kierkegaard/home/welcome

Worth doing or should they be avoided like the plague and instead go through the traditional route of reading the actual texts (start with the greek charts)?

>>8042280
do you think you'll ever write a paper inspired by /lit/ or internet culture in general?

>>8045579
N isn't a fucking naturalist.

>>8046055
ummm....

I think you are wrong, but you should say more about this.

Redpill me on the gre.
/subject test if you had to take it

>>8046109
a. you don't have to take the subject test
b. admissions committees don't give a fuck what your score is

>>8046113
Then why do they ask for it and why does everyone at top schools have really high gres?

>>8046108
Honestly I was trying to bait you into saying more into why he is a naturalist. But he never seemed like one in what I read of him at least. Maybe my definition of naturalism is stilted.

>>8046136
in the same way that hume is, namely he wants to model his theories on the kinds of causal explanations of phenomena found in the natural sciences. so it is naturalism as a guiding methodology.

>>8046128
mostly due to pressure from deans/divisional matters. individual departments don't have say over things like this.

>>8046128
oh and the 'high scores' thing: because the gre's are not difficult, and most people at top schools are pretty intelligent and well educated.

>>8046148
So in the end it still matters so they can check a box?

In which case GRE tips/what did you get?

>>8046157
No it doesn't really matter. Just don't do horribly. I don't remember what I got, but it was in the 99th percentile for verbal and 90+ for math. But it really isn't that important. And my advice would be to take a few practice tests, and if you aren't doing so hot buy a book and study.

Is it possible to go into a good undergrad program if I have already completed one not in America with shitty grades? I don't really know how educational system works there.

>>8046184
You should focus the vast majority of your energy on writing sample. That is what counts. What are you interested in/where are you thinking of applying? If I remember correctly cornell and MIT don't require the GRE.

>>8046188
>>8046157
meant for you

>>8046186
you mean do a second BA? i really don't know the rules/i think it might vary by institution.

>>8042280

I will be studying philosophy in Europe this summer.

How difficult would you say it is to become a professor? Any tips on how to go about your education if this is the endgame goal?

>>8046188
more english/literature focused, not philosophy; interesting in the "top" schools cause i'm a prestige whore. i'm not convinced i'm going to do it yet but i've been thinking about it more and more.

i'm not coming from a "traditional" background (im working in a completely unrelated industry) so i'm hoping a really high literature GRE score can maybe convince the adcom i'm not some dilettante who doesn't know anything. i'm trying to avoid doing a master's cause i'm not too enthused about paying 50k, given funded master's are almost non-existent. but it might be hard.

ahhhh what am i doing with my lifeeeee

>>8046192
I'm a med stud, my plan is to pass USMLE (exam, which allows working in medicine), then go to dental school if its possible

>>8046195
>I will be studying philosophy in Europe this summer.
>How difficult would you say it is to become a professor? Any tips on how to go about your education if this is the endgame goal?
Country? And just for this summer or are you planning the rest of your career there?

File: do-the-right-thing-dale-edwin-murray-lead.gif (518KB, 1050x489px) Image search: [Google]

518KB, 1050x489px

>>8042970
Depends. In undergrad, it doesn't really matter what school you go to, but state school with STEM. A humanities degree is pretty much worthless nowadays, except maybe philosophy (which still isn't as useful as your average STEM degree). Where you go only matters from grad school onwards. (I'm assuming you mean undergrad).

>>8042992
Autism.

>>8046387
found the state school pleb

fact: art history major from harvard will have "prestige" employers like google and goldman sachs and whatever courting them

degree is meaningless, school ranking/prestige isn't.

sure, a state school STEM degree is worth more than a state school humanities degree, but both pale in comparison to an ivy or equivalent degree.

>>8046390
let's try and cool it on the classism, kids

>>8042368
>A bit of string?
Goddamn charleton, if you knew ANYTHING about philophy you'd know that i was carrying a commemorative 9/11 penny and a vile of my dad's cum lmao fool

>>8042280
Hello OP. I recently finished my Bachelors of Physics and am currently in my first semester of my Masters but I am not really happy with the subject. I've been considering going into Philosophy instead because it was what I was most interested in before I began studying at UNI. I always figured I would somehow be able to study philosophy on the side, but ended up lacking the energy and time to properly work with some of the more complex philosophical texts properly.

What do you think of my idea? Am I certain to regret my choice somewhere down the line or might it end up being rewarding?

>>8042280
Do you like my poem?

Give me back your empty streets,
Show me the dread of your sad days past.
The end came so fast, I did not see your defeats.
Now new conquerors in your squares amass.

This city died and its spirit died with it.
It's promised exaltation came too late.

its not classicism it just describes the world

i dont think it's fair but society isnt fair. god knows "undeserving" people from top schools find themselves in prestige jobs and fast track to good career/lives.

>>8046207
A smart, polished writing sample on an interesting topic and letters from respected philosophers will do much more to convince adcoms that you're worth admitting. One thing that a couple people I've met have done that might help with this is hang around a good department (see http://www.philosophicalgourmet.com/overall.asp) for a year or so and sit in on some graduate seminars. You'd have to get permission from the profs to do it, but if you're not annoying it should be okay. Though of course whether this is feasible and worthwhile depends on lots of factors about your personal situation; only do it if you really love doing philosophy (same with going to grad school).

Good luck.

-Not OP, but also a phil grad student at a good school

>>8046445
well as i said i was more asking about literature and not philosophy programs, but i imagine similar process applies.

thanks for the help. can you elaborate more about
>sit in on some graduate seminars. You'd have to get permission from the profs to do it, but if you're not annoying it should be okay.
how does one do that? just email a prof and ask?

>>8046466
Ya, email the faculty, briefly introduce yourself, and say you are interested in the topic and would like to sit in on the course. There is a good chance they will let you, but sometimes they don't allow auditors, or will just have a strict cap on the number of people and not let you in.

>>8046281

Denmark. I'm beginning my university education this summer - probably what would be called undergraduate in the US.

>>8046109
No subject test. Got 167, 155, 6.0 on the regular GRE.

Do not listen to people who say GRE doesn't matter. Do not listen to people who say it doesn't. There are people on either side, equally adamant. All you can do is your best, to be safe. Which means a lot of misery prepping.

There are good prep books, easily pirated mostly, and the test questions are posted for free. There are simulated tests you can take, but don't use up all the simulations fucking around. You want to prep yourself to take the thing seriously.

There's not much you can really do in the short term to do better on verbal. The books will drill you on basic tricks and tips for identifying likely antonyms and stuff, and I'm sure you can learn a bare minimum of Latin/Greek prefixes or something to help out, but a lot of it is just innate skill and English proficiency.

Analytic (the essay writing), though, you can absolutely prepare for. It's 30 minutes. What you need to learn right now is that you can't write a killer essay in 30 minutes. What they want you to do, that is, to quickly plot out an essay's major points on your scrap paper, and then write the essay, is basically retarded. You'll be surprised how fast that 30 minutes speeds by. I write like 160WPM and I barely had time to pound out an essay I felt was fucking garbage, according to a vague "plan" I concocted in under a minute. Most people type half as fast. I don't know what they expect, honestly. They tell you to go back and check your essay - this basically won't be happening.

The prep books will give you good tips on how to visualize the essays, but really, your BIGGEST friend here is doing drills. Lots of drills. Go to the essay question bank and pick one and see what you can really do in 30 minutes. Get your body used to the adrenaline of taking that stupid fucking thing. Get your brain used to being given a totally retarded question that you can't make sense of, which might happen. When you do the simulated test program, and it gives you the essay questions that won't be graded and are only there for show, do them anyway. Get yourself used to it, and follow the basic instructions in the prep books (more is better, a few flourishes, a basic structure..) and you can at least guarantee a 5/6.

Don't be intimidated by test day. This might sound silly, but I felt like I was being processed through a big dehumanizing machine, and in the end it was just two very miserable test supervisors making billions of Asians fill out the same form over and over again, and then sitting in front of a shitty computer. Relax about it.

Another tip: You will never think of the GREs again for the rest of your life. They don't define you. They are RETARDED. Don't go into it like it's an apocalyptic watershed in your academic career. I haven't thought about them since the afternoon I took them. Even a lousy grade isn't the end of the world, even if you don't take them again. Just relax. It's a dumb formality.

>>8046574
It's really different from country to country. From what I've heard, Sweden recently got rid of tenure altogether. Germany has a ratio of 1:10 tenured positions to postdocs. The US usually has a lot more associate professorships, so it's easier there, but the system is more competeteive. You best ask one of the postdocs at your department about it.

>>8046195
>How difficult would you say it is to become a professor?

Sufficiently unlikely that it's not really a career you "aim for." It's not even difficult, really, it's just that there are infinite people trying to do it. That said, if you are phenomenally passionate and willing to devote your life to the study for the study's sake, it can always be done.

It's a weird question to answer. I watched my advisers answer it when students asked, including myself. In the few of us that they detected a real (let be honest, an autistic) desire to conquer the subject and make a life out of it, they said "it's hell, and risky, but there are always jobs." To the vast majority, even to many talented people, they said "don't bother, academia is a dead-end, there are too many applications and too few positions, etc."

Really depends on you.

>Any tips on how to go about your education if this is the endgame goal?

Treat every day like you have been given a miraculous opportunity to spend 3-5 years mastering your discipline. You can absolutely know more than a second year PhD student in your third year of undergrad, if you really, really care.

Keep your eyes out for other disciplines too - you might be surprised what interests you in the end. People jump from Political Science to History from BA-->PhD, stuff like that, all the time. Don't lock yourself off. Be broad.

Go to every single professor and ask for reading advice. Tell them you want a good bird's eye view of the field, of its history, of contemporary scholarship. Learn the intellectual history of your own discipline - almost nothing is as impressive as a student's ability, not just to produce precocious scholarship, but to understand the disciplinary status quo, how his work (or proposed work) fits into that, etc.

By your final year, you absolutely want to be in a position where you can focus your energies on an absolutely amazing writing sample. A pyramid whose broad "base" of general understanding you built studiously over several years can have a much higher potential peak of brilliance than any structure you try to slap together in a single year or semester, or a random term paper you try to overhaul.

>>8046207
Don't worry about dilettantism. They get all comers. Make yourself look like you know your shit, and it doesn't matter how you got there.

If you have absolutely zero background in anything related to the subject, like you're coming from Engineering, you're going to have a tough time getting in anywhere prestigious though.

>>8046602
Op here. I know many people who serve or have served on admissions committees at a few departments. None of them have every said GRE's are important. Most of them think they are totally meaningless and claim to not grant them any consideration whatsoever. It is, of course, possible that they are not being entirely honest. It is even more possible that they exert some unconscious influence at the early stage of selection. Certainly after they make their first cut most departments only pay attention to the writing sample. (Or, this is what I have heard.) However, if you are coming from a completely unknown school or some foreign countries it is plausible that it could have a larger impact in the sense that doing quite poorly could harm you.

>>8042368
you forgot "Slavoj Zizek"

Why do faggots always use exclamation marks?

>>8046602
>>8046799
Thank you appreciate it. I guess it can't hurt to do well on it so I might as well dedicate some time to hopefully getting a good score.

>>8046657

>If you have absolutely zero background in anything related to the subject, like you're coming from Engineering, you're going to have a tough time getting in anywhere prestigious though.

I have a Finance degree and Chem/English minors from a not-quite-Ivy school and I got As in all my English courses. I've been working in Finance for 3 years. I have a very cushy job and make way more than I should for how little I do (shitposting on 4chan from work right now kek). I still don't like finance that much that much so I'm trying to decide if I'm really ok with being poor and doing grad school in Lit or if I just think I'm ok with it

I'd like to think I know my shit and most signs point to that not being a totally absurd notion but there's definitely still some self-doubt. But I think I'm OK and I'm fairly certain I read and write well.

>>8046812
and stefan molyneux

>>8046799
I've heard similar stuff, and I err on the side of agreeing with you for sure, but honestly I've heard enough people on the other side saying that it does factor into the holistic assessment and might be a tipping factor. I say do your best, but don't agonize.

>>8046838
Seriously consider doing an MA. Get in touch with professors and ask what their opinion is. My adviser says that MA-->PhD is increasingly common in this era of 500,000 identical undergrad applicants.

The problem with an MA is that you can't use the actual thesis for your writing sample, since it'll obviously come too late. But it can still be a bridge and something that makes you look more plausible. Someone doing an MA in Lit after a break from undergrad, where they did very well in English, because their financial situation has changed (this you can put in your statement, even if you have to, uh.. spruce it up) and they can now pursue their dreams, is more plausible than an instant entry.

Letters of rec might fuck you really hard too. You ideally want very personalized letters. My profs warned me against even taking a one-year break, or doing my MA away from them, because it makes it harder to write "I've known this nigga forever and he's great"-tier letters. It's not implausible at all to ask for letters from your first-semester profs in a coursework or part-coursework MA.

Really though I think you ought to talk to professors. Experienced ones. Reach out to ones you used to know. You need some insider perspective.

>>8042298
this is gibberish

>>8046861
of course. it's analytic.

>>8043039
Aw that means any woman that is with him truly loves him.

>>8046865
>>8046861
it's real analysis you fucking morons

>>8046882
i don't study mathematics. how is anybody suppose to know what those symbols represent if they haven't previously studied mathematics? i bet you get a buzz shitposting math to people that don't study it on a japanese anime website stupid autistic moron

I'm a CS student and I enjoy everything related to Logic, like regular prepositional logic, first order logic, description logics, digital logic ( logic gates built with transistors and stuff ), logic programming, etc.
How much of this is taught to philosophy students?

>>8046899
I didn't post them. You are not stupid because you don't understand them, you are stupid for claiming they are gibberish and/or 'analytic' (and in turn claiming analytic philosophy is gibberish).

>>8042290
only literature programs do continental philosophy in the U.S. at an advanced level

>>8046906
i didn't claim that, i quite like analytic philosophy and i wasnt using gibberish in a literal sense, please dont be autistic next time. i doubt you know what it means either

>>8046903
Up through first order is standard, but many philosophy students do much more than that. For graduate students understanding basic first order model theory (soundness, completeness, compactness, lowenheim-skolem) is usually required, and most people learn a little bit of modal logic. But phil departments employ logicians, so you can do as much logic as you like at pretty much any good department.

>>8046909
This is not true. Philosophy departments are by far the best places to study continental philosophy in the US, you just have to go to the right one.

>>8046906
Analytic philosophy is wannabe math gibberish for autistic retards.

>>8046919
Name it then. And I don't mean undergraduate work. Btw I am a Ph.D. in Literature who couldn't find a good place to do critical theory outside of a literature department.

>>8046926
Columbia and Chicago would be far better places for critical theory than wherever you are.

>>8046942
I'd rather go to their comp lit and linguistics departments, respectively.

>>8046947
for critical theory?

>>8046919
Fuck analytics are such pieces of shit.

File: 63b27284-6ca3-42f4-9414-51522cef25f8..gif (2MB, 331x248px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 331x248px

>>8046926
What's your opinion on these literature/theory departments?
Berkeley
Harvard
Duke
Irvine
Stanford
Yale

>>8047796
Add Chicago and Columbia to that as well please

>>8047796
Why would anyone want to get a PhD in 'theory'? What do you think this is, 1985?