How do we stop him?

>>9776468
We don't. Giving it attention will make matters worse. Plebs will be plebs.

>>9776468
Meme him. Read all his books as a sarcastic ironic joke.

>>9776468
Could you explain the problem? If it gets people interested in Philosophy and then they read deeper into it, I can't see it being a bad thing.

>>9776468
This is okay. Certain knowledge is not supposed to be seen by the simple-minded. In many religious and mystic traditions of old the real philosophies were kept secret. They are not meant to be thrown as pearls in front of pigs. One needs initiation. Those who really care will seek out the real philosophies- this will to go beyond wiki articles and youtube videos is the initiation rite.

File: 37482A90-55E5-45FA-9676-15D635FFC12D.jpg (432KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

432KB, 1920x1080px

>>9776468
What you don't understand is that a part of philosophy is "pop" as in popular. And if your mad that the mainstream of your fetish is merging with the mainstream of pure unadulterated SHIT, I'd say you were already getting fucked, now it's just gonna be a circle jerk

Real thinking takes place in private, where no one has the password. God I love philosophy. It's like, no idiot can enter the academy and no man not an idiot would abstain from trying to enter

>>9776468
>This is a worrying trend.
No.
>Aside from watering down philosophy for normies
So?
>they have created a gigantic net which strangles everyone who would have otherwise pursued a fulfilling education.
Yeah fucking right.

>>9776491
> If it gets people interested in Philosophy and then they read deeper into it, I can't see it being a bad thing
The problem is that people will never get past SoL to crave true philosophy. Its fundamental problem is not that it bastardizes great thinkers. The true issue is that it creates an autistic world that indoctrinates its viewers into thinking that they have obtained full knowledge on the subject.
This is shown by the fact that SoL has almost always never analyzed anything further than ethics (in the form of a self help book), while leaving out topics that would require more depth to be complete.
Philosophers are treated as if they are condoms ready to be thrown into the trash the second they aren't immediately useful in someone's life.
People are never going to seek true knowledge if they are unable to get a taste of it.
>>9776495
I agree with the sentiment of keeping knowledge exclusive to small groups. However, the difficulty in joining them is artificial difficulty because of the massive pile of garbage that dilutes content.
It is one thing to know clearly what to go for and struggling to achieve it, and it's another thing to deal with sorting thousands of red herring junk in the hope of finding gold.
>>9776516
The popular side of philosophy was always a compromise between specificity and extension of content. It presupposes a complete grasp on the subject which is something that SoL doesn't have.
>Real thinking takes place in private
Agreed, but there needs to be a periodic renewal of fresh blood to avoid creating stagnation.

>>9776468
>pop philosophy is bad
>implying introducing plebs to advanced material in language they can understand is a bad thing
It may be bad presentation, over-generalization , or straight muddy, but even if just the bareback core concepts are got across, it's a success overall. Imagine what would happen if retardation was toned down even a tiny bit in society.

>>9776468
The effects of the trend can be interpreted in a positive way: SoL keeps the normies out by functioning as a pleb filter. If an intellect is satisfied by an 8 minute video on Kant, it would never have pursued philosophy in a meaningful way which means it will never ask silly questions on /lit/ because it tried to read the actual material and it will never ask inane questions in a college seminar, and it's all thanks to the videos making everything so accessible and clear and with that satisfying the normie's curiosity which would otherwise have grown into something much more annoying, namely an inadequate mind seeking answers it can't comprehend. Good thing we have Allen Button!

Furthermore it obscures and thereby elevates actual philosophy and philosophical ability. Thanks to SoL you will be that much more of a wizard to everyone around you.

Just be careful not to identify in any way with reading philosophy. Because the only thing suffering here is the cultural prestige of philosophy as the study of wisdom ("I watched the video too, smartass"). But the thing is that has been lost for centuries, not since Alan PowerBottom started uploading videos. You think anyone thinks of philosophy as profound anymore nowadays?

So forget your, pardon my french, shitty little identity of being a student of philosophy. Apply what you read and rekk normies with your wisdom instead. SoL is making it easier for you because everyone "understands" Kant now, right?

>>9776468
>tfw bought status anxiety years ago but never read it
should I just throw it in the trash

File: 2017-07-08 23.10.50.png (169KB, 500x611px) Image search: [Google]

169KB, 500x611px

Alain de bottom is the godhead. He is simply the most intelligent and powerful being in existence currently

>>9776468
The New York Times

Here is the response from ADB to their review

>Caleb, you make it sound on your blog that your review is somehow a sane and fair assessment. In my eyes, and all those who have read it with anything like impartiality, it is a review driven by an almost manic desire to bad-mouth and perversely depreciate anything of value. The accusations you level at me are simply extraordinary. I genuinely hope that you will find yourself on the receiving end of such a daft review some time very soon – so that you can grow up and start to take some responsibility for your work as a reviewer. You have now killed my book in the United States, nothing short of that. So that's two years of work down the drain in one miserable 900 word review. You present yourself as 'nice' in this blog (so much talk about your boyfriend, the dog etc). It's only fair for your readers (nice people like Joe Linker and trusting souls like PAB) to get a whiff that the truth may be more complex. I will hate you till the day I die and wish you nothing but ill will in every career move you make. I will be watching with interest and schadenfreude.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/28/books/review/Crain-t.html

File: IMG_4816.jpg (29KB, 236x298px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 236x298px

>>9776529
>there needs to be a periodic renewal of fresh blood to avoid creating stagnation

I have book for you mein friend

>>9776468
Botton was my introduction to philosophy. I started with "Consolations", and now I'm halfway through a college textbook on truth functional and first-order logic.

Really his books are good to read in so far as they are introductions to philosophy, not complete accounts of it. Reading some reviews of his books helped me realise this from the get go, before I started to think I knew everything I needed to know about philosophy from his books alone.

The intellectually shallow will watch his videos, learn something, and go on with their lives. What does it matter? Some of them (like me) will not be satisfied, and therefore go on to read the actual philosophy itself. The problem isn't with SoL if an 8 minute video stimulates me to learn some more, and completely sates another. It's the intellectual curiosity of the person that's the problem, and you can't change that imo. SoL piqued mine; it satiated others'

>>9776623
This is perfect

>>9776529
Autism

File: max von montgelas 2.jpg (14KB, 143x167px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 143x167px

>>9776696
>Botton was my introduction to philosophy
>He didn't start with the presocratics

>>9776468
Do not buy his over priced shoes and honey.

>>9776468
Reading books by De Botton is a pseudo-intellectual excuse for living the uncontemplated life. But if he grants normies fulfilment, patricians can concentrate on real philosophy and literature without being bothered by Alain fanboys.