Which is the superior method of uncovering the nature of reality,

>uncovering the nature of reality
Not what philosophy is for.

>>8819272
I think it sort of is, yeah, if 'uncovering the nature of reality' just means something like 'finding out how things are'

>>8819268

>Why should the history of an idea be relevant to the idea itself

Hot kekes when people actually unironically believe this

File: 1453153994702.jpg (119KB, 900x1266px) Image search: [Google]

119KB, 900x1266px

>>8819268
>justification

this on what powerless men spend their time and then demand a paid career over 40 years

>>8819276
When people unironically believe it should or should not be relevant?

>>8819285

Should not be relevant

>>8819285
please look at the context

>>8819276
So how is it important if, say, Kant formulated his transcendental philosophy while having sex with his friends wife? How would that change the philosophy? You don't need to even know who Pythagoras was to understand his mathematics.

>>8819289
Just making sure :-)

>>8819296
I know the context. I've seen this image 100 times. That's what I thought anon meant. Just double checking.

>>8819297
>conflating biographical information with the history embedded in how certain concepts are apprehended, interpreted, and understood in a given era

please leave

>>8819309
>conflating history with formulation
You must be a continental if you struggle so greatly with definitions.
>>8819272
Your post is irrelevant if you don't posit your own definition.

>>8819297

>Because not every element of context and history is relevant to an idea, no element of context and history is

That is obviously non sequitur

Even with the most basic and unassuming claims and theories (e.g. Pythagoras' mathematics) we must assume that the ideas translate into the language of the reader. And this may be a significant context if languages differ dramatically in the way that they conceive numbers or the numbers that they do conceive.

Even if that wasn't an important facet, the example still doesn't account that most philosophy deals with more substantive concepts than numbers (e.g. the self, ideas, mind) which have a more obvious background.

>>8819310
confessing you're an analytic is an admission of autism, virginity, and nonexistent social skills.

>>8819313
>that most philosophy deals with more substantive concepts than numbers (e.g. the self, ideas, mind) which have a more obvious background.
That would be continental philosophy, which I have already assumed to be worthless when writing the image. Real philosophy is objective, like mathematics.

>>8819268
A synthesis of the analytic tendency for autistic abstraction and continental phenomenology made actually legible.

>>8819315
This is why continental philosophy is such drivel, you spend so much time obsessing over social conquests that you miss what philosophy really is. It's like you've actually taken the abstract idea of philosophy, that one of your ilk may recite to an impressionable 20 year old student, to heart.

>>8819310
>You must be a continental if you struggle so greatly with definitions.
Definitions are not fixed or even stable. The link between a word and its meaning is arbitrary. You must know literally nothing about linguistics or philosophy of language if you DON'T struggle with definitions. His post was perfectly clear. Your "objection" was braindead at best and you are obviously not capable of critical thought if you don't realize this.

>Your post is irrelevant if you don't posit your own definition.
Actually, just because he didn't posit his own definition doesn't mean he's wrong. What's your definition?

>>8819318
>Real philosophy is objective, like mathematics.
The 'true scotsman' rears his ugly head.

>>8819309
we can tear full ideas from their historical contexts and evaluate them as true or false
languages don't differ in the way you want them to differ

to the extent that ideas rest on presuppositions dictated by historical context, these presuppositions should be enumerated and noted--thankfully, to the extent that they're the sort of things upon which ideas can rest, they can be

>>8819320
>>8819318
you guys need to read more analytic philosophy; it isn't all, or even anywhere near mostly, logical positivism

read some Putnam, Velleman, Nussbaum, etc.; lots of non-continental philosophers operate with a keen eye towards what it's like to be a human

>>8819327
>Definitions are not fixed or even stable. The link between a word and its meaning is arbitrary. You must know literally nothing about linguistics or philosophy of language if you DON'T struggle with definitions
Is that you Zizek? Never thought I'd see a true idiot in the wild.
>His post was perfectly clear. Your "objection" was braindead at best and you are obviously not capable of critical thought if you don't realize this.
Baseless assertion.
>Actually, just because he didn't posit his own definition doesn't mean he's wrong.
Poor comprehension once again.
>What's your definition?
Already posited.

>>8819318

You didn't make the image, but anyway that's obviously not right is it.

Are Descartes, Searle, Hume, and Ayer part of the Continental or the Analytic cannon? All of those authors refer to the self, mind and ideas in their writing.

>>8819331
I've read Putnam but not the others. I don't like his methodological anarchy, which is why I like phenomenology.

>>8819335
Descartes and Hume are part of Modern Philosophy, Searle and Ayer are analytics. These schisms are dangerous and fucking stupid.

>>8819332
Let's recap. Your example of why "the history of an idea" is not relevant-

>So how is it important if, say, Kant formulated his transcendental philosophy while having sex with his friends wife?

I'm pretty sure you weren't even joking or shitposting. That's actually what you think this means. But yeah, baseless assertion.

>>8819335
I did make the image. The fact that you don't recognise this is tesament to your lack of understanding.
All of those philosophers can be seen as either. They have influenced both.

>>8819347
So you don't know the difference between formulation and history?

>>8819331
I never suggested we couldn't wrestle meaning or truth-value from any given claim made from whatever historical epoch. I was mainly highlighting that a critique of the history attached to a given concept is not reducible to the biography of the thinker.

>>8819348

So they can rightly be seen as analytic, in which case it isn't true that the self, ideas and mind are exclusively concerns of continental philosophy?

>>8819345

Possibly, I didn't define the terms of the discussion though so IDK why you're making that complaint to me

>>8819345
Hume is based

>>8819268
Analytics deal more in metaphysics as an "inquiry into the fundamental constituents of the world" as opposed to the frankly oddball and bizarre social/ethical """metaphysics""" of continental philosophy. I'd suggest sticking with analytic metaphysics if you're asking for what I think you're asking for, although continentals who deal in phenomenology are interesting and well worth the time

>>8819359
If a baker makes houses is building bakery?

>>8819355
>>8819355
if you look at the post you were responding to in the context of the thread you happen to be in, you'll notice that it was just that thesis the person you were responding to was defending--did you take him to say that history is unimportant?

>>8819362
Some (like Ayer) advocated the destruction of metaphysics as unverifiable and never matter-of-fact. The radical empiricists. They were basically Humeans driven to their logical conclusion.

>>8819399
logical positivism only characterized early analytic philosophy and has not been popular with analytics for 60 years

>>8819403
True, but the essence of the Vienna Circle lives on in the cold physicists of today.

>>8819403
thank you

Analytic philosophy is just a bunch of academics playing Sudoku

>>8819389
I think you misunderstand my position. I'm not arguing in favor of a pure formalism. I'm taking issue with the notion in the image, "Why would the history of an idea be relevant to the idea itself," as being misrepresented as biographical tidbits contextualizing the life of the thinker. When critics investigate "the history of the idea," they are not reading Kant's biography but instead mapping out the ways in which certain concepts are subject to a variance of interpretation over an extended period of time. This can be informed by historical, philosophical, OR biographical context, but it isn't merely reducible to the latter. In other words, I'm just defending the idea that one can trace a history of an idea without it being solely reducible to the biography of the thinker of said concept.

>>8819449
right, but since it's the wrestling meaning and truth value out of given claims that's philosophically relelvant, the history of an idea is only philisophically relevant to the extent that it's essential to interpretation -- that is, to the extent that the idea on paper, by itself, is fragmentary and rests on tacit presuppositions that we don't share

when critics investigate the history of an idea, as you've described, this isn't what they're doing, or it isn't *all* they're doing; this doesn't mean what they're doing is not worthwhile, it just means that much of it isn't philosophy -- much of it is only relevant to philosophy in that it's *about* philosophy

>>8819268
There goes that ignorant westerner either/or dialectic regarding, funnily enough, two western traditions

>>8819536
Should we check our white privilege? I'm literally shaking.

File: adi-shankara-himalaya.jpg (32KB, 420x439px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 420x439px

>>8819268
>European "philosophy"
Both are pleb as fuck

>>8819551
Eastern philosophy is pseudo intellectual sophistry designed to oppress plebeian citizens in India. You worship a gluttonous Indian prince, you're just a boot licker. Dogma has no place in philosophy.

>>8819551
POO

IN

LOO

>>8819276
This.

>>8819297
Jesuschrist.

facepalm.jpg

>>8819553
philosophy is literally just a dogma of formal systems

>he still cares about philosophy
>hasn't moved on to political economy

not going to make it senpai

>>8819553
You've obviously never actually studied it. There's just as much debate and different movements in eastern philosophy as there is in western philosophy. It's basically what continental philosophy would be if it wasn't taken over by bullshit artists.

>>8819742
Name five objectively true formulae or ideas that they have contributed.

>>8819553
Not a fan of Eastern Philosophy but early Buddhism (Theravada) is at least equal to ''some'' Greek philosophy.

The mystical wax-on wax-off bullshit is a mixture of later fusions with local culture's superstitions and 19th century orientalist translations.

If you're interested I'd recommend anything by Richard F Gombrich if you'd like a more critical examination of Buddhist philosophy that isn't "dudeweedlmao" b.s.

File: 1448802080225.png (144KB, 309x309px) Image search: [Google]

144KB, 309x309px

>>8819268
>uncovering the nature of reality

HAHAHAHA

I like analytical more, but it *is* true that the history of an idea is relevant to the idea itself. If a complicated question has been discussed for a long time, it is a good idea to view what others have said in order to know the arguments, or where was the fallacy that you shouldn't commit, etc...

File: A052_Nietzche[1].jpg (22KB, 300x281px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 300x281px

>reality

The philosophical "truth" doesn't exist, analytical philosophy is a mess of Jewish psychology

>>8819742

>yeah but * sniff * it isn't * sniff * communism, so it's not really true thinking

Everyone who has posted in this thread is a pseudo-intellect.

>>8819809
Much much closer to the realization of reality than anything after.

>>8820818
Yes because he initiated the departure from this thought.

>>8819749
>>8820167
Study the texts and arguments like any serious philosopher, or shut your ignorant consumerist pleb cuckhole.

>>8820832

No, because he returned to it.

>>8819332

why are you so interested in denying historicism?

>>8819759
You're just another cunt trying to fit thoughts into schemas you already established, so they don't cause any actual thought to appear in your mind.

Everyone who has posted in this thread is a pseudo-intellect.

>>8820856
>Pseudo
Welcome to the club, cucko.

>>8819332
>Zizek

See, this is why the history of ideas is important. That idea of arbitrary relationships between words and definitions (which is, by the way, correct) comes from de Saussure.

2/10 , read more.

>>8819318
No one but a hopelessly ignorant young pseud could be this disgustingly single minded

You really and truly think that there's no way you could be wrong. Your mind has decayed under the careful guardianship of liberal education.

Analytics are cucks lol. Even Rorty saw it's useless bullshit

>philosophy is meant to "uncover the nature of reality"
wew laddy. Philosophy is only useful when it deals in the experiences and world of human beings. Most philosophy is just word-games and autistic nonsense. Metaphysics is a complete joke and an embarrassment to human thought.

>>8820837

>consumerist

Awww, baby's first insult.
Everyone just buys buys buys!!

>>8819809
Neetch uncovered the nature of reality and it drove him insane.

>>8819268
Continental. Analytic philosophers are basically failed mathematicians. Even real mathematicians aren't smart enough for Continental thought, so why would failed ones be anything but worse?

>>8819268
Neither.
Only the sciences study reality. Analytic philosophy is useful as a meta language to talk about the structure of scientific theories, and only some analytic philosophy at that.

>>8819268
>uncovering the nature of reality
>uncovering
>Implying anyone but Heidegger and maybe Aristotle ever cared about this

>>8819268
>uncovering

Neither. That's what science does. Philosophers frame our misunderstanding.

File: 11138-004-6699034E.jpg (18KB, 217x300px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 217x300px

>>8822886
You are like a little baby

>>8822924
You're like a barista.

>>8822924
>You are like a little baby
>posts a picture of a man-child.

File: Apotheosis-of-St.-Thomas-Aquinas-1024x859.jpg (268KB, 1024x859px) Image search: [Google]

268KB, 1024x859px

Scholasticism.

>>8823012
Memes have changed since you've been gone, old friend.

>>8819268
Obviously analytic.

Continental philosophy is a mess of vague concepts and poorly substantiated ideas.

>>8824086
>poorly substantiated ideas
>the axioms of analytic philosophy aren't ultimately arbitrary

File: 1464930403183.jpg (93KB, 600x800px) Image search: [Google]

93KB, 600x800px

>>8824078

>>8824099
>the axioms of analytic philosophy aren't ultimately arbitrary

Far less 'arbitrary' than any continental 'axioms' kek