Thread replies: 7
Thread images: 4
Thread images: 4
Anonymous
Philosophy and Politics 2016-08-06 22:33:22 Post No. 8368489
[Report] Image search: [Google]
Philosophy and Politics 2016-08-06 22:33:22 Post No. 8368489
[Report] Image search: [Google]
File: images.png (19KB, 490x300px) Image search:
[Google]
19KB, 490x300px
Why is it that post-structuralists are usually left leaning while neo-positivists are the opposite.
What drives this correlation?
>>
>>8368489
>neo-positivists are the opposite.
I don't believe that.
Prove your claim.
>>
>>8368489
Post-19th century philosophy is fuckin' trash.
>>
File: 1470279959864.jpg (9KB, 168x195px) Image search:
[Google]
9KB, 168x195px
>being an analytic philosopher
>doing autistic math problems with words for a century with literally nothing to show for it
>unity of science is dead
>positivism is dead
>neo-positivism is a joke
>anything called "analytic ______" (metaphysics, marxism, etc.) is always a joke
>wanting to be a mathematician this badly and not just becoming one
>>
This is why I prefer mohist logic: argument by repetitive analogy.
>>
>>8368489
They're all fags tho
>>
File: 3d-smiley-new.jpg (35KB, 615x615px) Image search:
[Google]
35KB, 615x615px
neo-positivists are mostly middle of the road liberals, post-structuralists are all over the place from weird neo-marxism to neoliberalism
Thread posts: 7
Thread images: 4
Thread images: 4