>freshman in university >have to take third subject >quite

I really like this painting.

>>8744319
Horse looks so comfy

>>8744322
It really does. If horses could purr this would be their purr face.

>>8744290
most schools offer a course on thought from "kant to nietzsche"

idk why but its pretty standard. look for that.

>>8744361
Yeah man I'm just shitposting. It's actually pretty good.

I'm just salty because my being a huge humanities-fag in an analytic department means my philosophy grades suck, compared to what they would be in a continental department.

>Analytic philosophers
>Rejecting the mind

I think you walked into imaginationsville.

>>8744372
i majored in political theory. those courses were 80%+ continental thought.

i took a 'philosophy' course for a breadth requirement and it was all analytical trash.

difference in enjoyment was night and day.

>>8744402
I bet you're an idiot pseud who champions the banner of analytic philosophy while barely reading any

>>8744322
I think the horse looks sad and then man is comforting him, but, for whatever reason the man is also sad and needs this embrace himself

What's their story /lit/ ?

>>8744494
The man is a horse girl and I'm not interested in their story because I've long since learned to S T E E R C L E A R

File: received_571651039702169.jpg (25KB, 500x401px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 500x401px

>>8744290
I had an identical experience with a neuroscience obsessed department as well

>>8744372
haha yeah, that's why you can't do analytic philosophy, because you like nietzsche
or maybe it's cause you're not smart enough?
plenty of analytics like nietzsche and kierkegaard

>>8744592
>analytic philosophy is hard

kek nice meme

>>8744559
He's ironically a glue salesman who feels guilty for what he does, having to face the staring of his pet horse everytime he comes home from work. The horse doesn't know whats going on itself, in fact it's starving because he doesn't know how to take care of a horse and how should he living in a one bed room appt--certainly not a place for a horse. He just wanted the horse as a means of justifying what he does for a living as if to say, "I'm not a bad guy, look I have a horse."

An animosity builds between the man and the horse because he feels as though the horse is silently judging him behind his back, silently suffering as his brothers and sisters are dying to make glue though in reality the horse simply cannot live on the catfood he thinks is necessary to feed it.

Finally though he breaks down, taking the horse in his arms in a hug--feeling as though the horse has finally accepted him and his living though in reality the horse is too weak to reject the embrace

>>8744598
he just said he's not able to get good grades

File: me rn 2.jpg (478KB, 1600x1182px) Image search: [Google]

478KB, 1600x1182px

>>8744592
>plenty of analytics like nietzsche and kierkegaard
Very few of the analytics who make statements like "logic is king" are fans of lebensphilosophie.

And I find the fact that you can make an assumption about my intelligence from the fact that I conflict with an analytical framework, quite telling. Have you actually read any Kierkegaard? He'd be slaughtered by anyone looking at him through a lens of "premise-premise-premise-conclusion" but thankfully, most of us don't think that way. And if you do, well, back to /sci/ buddy

>>8744623
whoa there big boy, all I'm saying is that if your self worth is grounded in counterfactuals rather than in accomplishments, maybe it's time to take a step back

>freshman in university
>like Dostoyevsky, Nietzsche, Kierkegaard, shit like that
>I'm a poetry/music/artfag
>fall for the /lit/ meme and take philosophy 101
>it's all nonsensical claims, word games, and muh logic
>no discussion of the human experience, instead everybody jacks themselves off over irrelevant, unfalsifiable ideas about "mind" and "knowledge"

>>8744605
Because analytic philosophy assignments take such tremendous effort to say the most banal and useless shit

>>8744643
hahahaha
your criticism of analytic philosophy is that it's
>unfalsifiable

fucking /lit/

>>8744654
My critique of analytic philosophy is that I can't imagine them masturbating or experiencing pleasure in any way and that I think they're all philosophical zombies.

>>8744654
Of all the different aspects of it that he listed of course an autismlynic would focus on that

>>8744654
I wasn't referring to analytic philosophy. My philosophy 101 was mostly Enlightenment/scientific revolution guys.

Analytic philosophy is banal and pseudoscientific, but hearing some aristocrat from the 1700s think about "the nature of mind" is almost comical.

>>8744649
aww, so you could if you really tried?
do you buy that?
how about other people? do they buy that?
does your family buy that?
they'll talk about you in ten years:
>anon is working as a marketing intern at a law firm, but the important thing is that his intrinsic aptitude is so high, he could've been an academic if he really wanted to

what a fucking circlejerk

>>8744686
t. insecure twentysomething who just grew out of his "smart but lazy" phase and needs to tell everyone about how "mature" he is
>muh tough love

>>8744686
Boyo I don't have have infinite time and energy to devote to any boring bullshit, I literally rather shitpost on an anime website

>>8744686
The guy you're replying to isn't the O.P

I am. And I'm not gonna claim I could get do well easily in analytic philosophy, but I will claim that the reasons it's more difficult, for the most part, aren't deficiencies on my part, but deficiencies on the part of the course, which demands that assignments and arguments be railroaded down this minimalist, semantic this-and-this-therefore-this route, that literally no worthwhile philosophy of the past has followed

>>8744712
A "minimalist, semantic this-and-this-therefore-this route" is honestly the easiest, simplest form of philosophical argument. It's boring, but it shouldn't be difficult if you can into logic and math.

>>8744722
Hence the fucking point its easy but takes way too much effort to bother

>>8744722
Easiest and simplest if you want to end up with a set of uninventive truisms. It encourages you not to consider concepts, but to use them unquestioningly.

Also I can't into math. I have to use my fingers to count shit man.

Logic on the other hand I am pretty okay with, as long as we recognize that it's a field of philosophy, not philosophy itself. Analytics tend to take it as a underlying thread, inescapable. The problem here is then you render irrelevant all the philosophers who put forward arguments that don't rely on traditional logic, which, let's be honest, makes up the majority of interesting thinkers.

Let's take maybe Kierkegaard's most famous quote:
“If there were no eternal consciousness in a man, if at the bottom of everything there were only a wild ferment, a power that twisting in dark passions produced everything great or inconsequential; if an unfathomable, insatiable emptiness lay hid beneath everything, what would life be but despair?”
The approach I'm talking about would render that passage like this:
1) If there is no eternal consciousness in man, life would be despair
2) I don’t want life to be despair
C: There is eternal consciousness in man

But does anyone really think that's all that's going on in that passage. You'd have to be a pretty impoverished thinker to believe so.

>>8744728
If it's so easy, why didn't you just do the work and get good grades?

>>8744780
Because I want to shitpost on an anime website

>>8744599
>He's ironically a glue salesman who feels guilty for what he does, having to face the staring of his pet horse everytime he comes home from work
please turn this into a full length short story

>>8744623
>thankfully, most of us don't think that way
>thankfully, most of us are retarded and don't understand logic
lol

>>8744319
>>8744322
>>8744340
STEER CLEAR

Continental/Analytic divide should really be rethought in terms of Dialectical/Positivist. this really clears up the difference between them. dialectics is expansive—a la Deleuze (who is openly against dialectics of the Hegelian type but who nevertheless thinks dialectically) philosophy becomes the creation of concepts, the expansion of thought into unknown turf. positivism on the other hand is always at pains to reduce, to break down, to stop things up, to hypostasize the concept until it is so specific as to be useless.

>>8745291
if this was written ca. 1935, you'd be dead on; as it is, you have no idea what you're talking about

>>8745291
But analytic philosophy is not positivist

>>8745607
don't engage with the strange man, honey, he's just expressing how he feels

>>8745599
>>8745607
>>8745618

the critique must be radical; it must seize things at the root; and the corrupt root of the positive has not yet been plucked

>>8744290
Fight back

>>8744599
I like you. You left out the bit where he was making bird traps from the glue.

>>8744592
>analytics, the autists of the philosophies, like a man whose main conclusion was "you just gotta believe bro"
I think not

>>8744787
I won't. I'm going to leave it here to tragically die, forgotten, when this thread becomes archived. If you want it written then write it yourself and if I see it on a bookshelf one day I'll give you a frowning nod in half remembrance

>>8745627
>those cold psychotic unsmiling horse girl eyes
Ravioli Ravioli
Give me the STEER CLEARioli

>>8745627
Is it just me or is she guzzling horse cum?