Nowhere is the hostility of the Anglo-American tradition toward

>>9533565
yo, i dig. who is this a quote from?

>>9533578

https://books.google.se/books?hl=sv&lr=&id=knx3dYEBTVQC&oi=fnd&pg=PR9&dq=jameson%27s+recent+essay,+%22marxist+criticism+and+hegel&ots=SQOuBnTjyw&sig=7W_b4yW9UsvuqsGn40_5ZZTueq0&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=jameson%27s%20recent%20essay%2C%20%22marxist%20criticism%20and%20hegel&f=false

>>9533565
Is this why I had add as a kid

File: he_wasnt_wrong.jpg (34KB, 600x380px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 600x380px

>>9533687
FUCK fredric jameson

>>9533565
Anglos only like things that are provable. That is why they appeal to misguided epistemology like science and mathematics. Watch a debate with an Anglo and count the times they ask for, or appeal to, the notion of "facts". They don't think, but rather piece together strings of information they, dogmatically, deem, in their false authority, to be true. They try to "debunk" historical and dialectical materialism, Marxism, based on such ludicrous ideas. Look at Keynes or neé Anglo, Austria.

>>9533729
Anglos are such a simple lot you'd imagine they were all gathered together beneath the aegis of a single politics, religion, philosophy....
Know your enemy, friend.

>>9534299
The ideology of capitalistic imperialism is the Ceé Anglo.

>>9533729
The problem isn't that they are "facts fetishists", the problem is that they extend their facts fetish to areas where no facts exist, such as ethics, which is why you get pure autism like utilitarianism when Anglos start talking about morality.

>>9533565
> yfw derrida

>>9534336
Facts don't exist at all.

>>9534370
Of course they do.

>>9534386
How so? We can't observe objectively and have no way of knowing what actually Is.

>>9533729
>Anglos only like things that are provable
Intellectual pleb dedacted. You have to have premises before you can proof anything.

>>9534402
Proof is ridiculous. Nothing can be proved, and to look for proof is to miss the point of engaging in thought.

>>9534414
there are infinite primes
it has been proven

>>9534414
Do you see, why your statment is contradictio in adiecto?
P.1 Nothing can be proved
C.1 There is no proof

>>9534437
No, it is presupposed.
>>9534449
But those statements are in agreement.

>>9534414
Proof has its place, but not in the more literary disciplines where what is sought is agreement. Not IS, but what's better, and why. This 'why' will be in conflict with some other 'why,' not some objective standard.

>>9534487
It has no place. It is a myth, like facts.

>>9534457
That is not what a presupposition is. You need to brush up on your philosophical terminology.

>>9534495
I use it in a way I have defined differently, actually.

>>9534494
it has a place in mathematics

>>9534513
No. Mathematics is just a tautology with numbers.

>>9534519
what is proof? yeah fuck yourself

>>9534528
Mathematical proofs are tautologies.

>>9534534
no what is """proof"""

>>9534553
A myth that is claimed to show what Is, but has never been seen.

to call something a model, you know
-the ''reality''
-the model
-the discrepancy between the model and the ''reality''

without these three things, you do not know you have modeled anything. All you have is the model and no knowledge of anything beyond the ''model'', no knowledge that there is a modelling of anything.

And if you have these three things, you know the ''reality'', thus you do not need to model it afterwards, so it is useless to have models.

>>9533565
I actually like the sentiment and it could apply to many people on /lit/ and to difficult but ambitious books; however, the specific support of obfuscatory leftist philosophy doesn't quite suit me.

>>9534649
>things I don't understand are obfuscatory

File: tmp_7177-Doron_Zeilberger_(circa_2005)1467282069.jpg (18KB, 300x394px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 300x394px

>>9534437
>there are infinite

>>9534457
But it is a proof and therefore your statement is an antinomy, but I don't think your understanding of logic is sofisticated enough to get this. In very crude and simpilyfied/somewhat not completly accurate terms, the fact there is a proof invalidades the stated premise.

>>9533565

An imaginary connection between clear writing and agreement with what is written.

Hey, look, someone trying to hide his dumb ideas behind a big paragraph! Amazing.

>>9534519
This is a grave error-- saying the same thing twice for lack of a concluding thought is not the same thing as figuring out how to reconcile sets of quantities in order to make a brand new point. Letters and numbers are fundamentally different even if, ultimately, numbers are 'merely' words.

ITT: this board is chock fucking full of pseuds

>>9535446
what a reveal