Do Analytical philosophers

well seeing as Kripke revolutionized modal logic while he was still in high school

I would have to say yes

agreed

>>9875052
Well analytic philosophy is basically high-level mathematical logic whereas continental philosophy borders on high-level verbal masturbation so I'd argue yes although at the same time I also wouldn't say that's the only valid opinion.

>>9875676
>high-level mathematical logic
kek, analytical philosophy is for failed mathematicians if anything. Please don't besmirch mathematical logic with your 20th century "how many angels can dance on the head of a pin" analog

continental philosophy is literally

"lets use complex words to sound smart"

>>9876311
>complex words

for u

>>9875052
mostly why jews do it*

up to the highest levels, analytic philosophers are much smarter, but at the highest level, no geniuses are analytic.

>>9878070
>Kripke isn't a genius
>Quine isn't a genius

>>9878106
> Implying they even compare to hegel and Nietzsche

>>9878126
Geniuses like Hegel and Nietzsche only come around every several hundred years, and Continental philosophy is about 200 years old and Analytic only about 100.

Also, the scope of analytic philosophy is limited by its nature, so it's not like the geniuses of Analytic philosophy get to show off their genius in huge systems and wild pronouncements.

>>9878070
>mfw this is right

>>9878147
they were seperated by a few decades and the rest of your post makes about as much sense

Everyone in this thread should stick their heads in a pressure chamber...follow that rule faggits

>>9878147
You're ignoring we've had in the span of a 100 years people like Heidegger, Derrida and Husserl (and these guys were fucking ASCENDED), not to mention a guy like Badiou (I dislike him but the man is very clearly a genius in his own right).
I don't think it's fair to say analytic philosophers are more inteligent but they're certainly much more efficient than a guy like Agamben (who I absolutely love) who spent 30 years coming up with a BASIC theory for his thought.

>>9878158
Nope

>>9878161
You're getting caught up in the spectacle. Being a genius doesn't mean creating a spectacle.

>>9878170
You don't create a spectacle, the spectacle exists.

>>9878180
So this is the power of Continental philosophy...

>>9878194
The way the guy structured his sentence
>You're getting caught up in the spectacle.
suggest he's talking about The Spectacle, as in, Guy Debord's Society of. You can't claim there is "a spectacle" that's created, it exists as the mediation of everyday life by images, whether you like it or not.

>>9878205
I figured as much, but I don't know enough about Debord to make a clever joke.

>>9878221
Thats why you should stick to analytic philosophy.

>>9878295
Yea I mean, local truth > totalizing fascist truth

>>9875052
apples and oranges. what do you mean by raw intellect? does everything need to be "objectively" measured and compared by your so-called analytic mind? They both have a place in philosophical discourse. Stop thinking in such binary, simplistic terms.