How true is this, Yea Forums?

the most vital and innovative part of philosophy is what you often deride as identity politics: feminism, critical race theory, queer theory and transgender

Anons,... anons,... lets not let this degenerate into shit slinging. Both fields have very valuable additions to history in completely different ways. The first would be the logic path, which pretty much opened up computer languages and such, afaik. Pretty dope.

The more continental tradition has given consciousness a critical edge which I think for better or worse has been an enrichment. There was a baitish post about books that changed your life. Pic related came to mind and i went along my way. I cant say that I regret reading the frankfurt school. I feel its only been enriching.

On the other hand. Fuck intellectualism.

Attached: images (70).jpg (220x365, 15K)

>Anons,... anons,... lets not let this degenerate into shit slinging. Both fields have very valuable additions to history
upvoted, fellow unassertive redditor

>analytic philosophers be like

Attached: 2D2F64D6-76CA-4568-A2DC-49CE1201A808.jpg (275x183, 27K)

tired of soulless geeks who say this

Don't be sad. Not everyone is a STEMfag.

found the brainlet

name one relevant contemporary philosopher. one

>inb4 nick meme

Where do post-Kantians fall? I'm technically considered a continental because I include Heidegger in my competency and interests, but I hate the French and I hate being lumped in with them.

>post-Kantians
sophists like the rest of the bunch
>muh Dasein, so meaningful
get a clue

wtf is this shitty play on chad/virgin meme, guess its a little too spicy for le-redcucks

I can’t take people with blond hair seriously

pretty sure thats a Yea Forums image

>he thinks it must be sophistry because he can't understand it

Go read Hume or something.

Not very.

Based.

Yea Forums pseuds love continental philosophy, cause it doesnt require any knowledge or self-disciplines to spout flowery, unfalsifiable, profoundly meaningless gibberish like "Dasein", "the Other", "simulacra", "alienation", "social construct" etc.

analytic philosophy isn't as pompous, but incredibly boring and incredibly devoid of life

The important thing is you found a way to convince yourself that you're better than both sides.

Does the term "alienation" really cause you that much difficulty? Maybe philosophy isn't the issue, you could just be fucking retarded.

I wish the Yea Forums pseuds who genuinely like metaphysics also knew contemporary analytic metaphysics. They make fools of themselves without that knowledge, often times the only metaphysics they know is at best a hundred years behind the times, at worst it's stuck in the ancient era. And they should also know German Idealism because it's fascinating. Continental metaphysics after that is minimal but you've got Heidegger and Deleuze. What often ends up happening is that instead of learning to love both historical and contemporary metaphysics, people read either or both continental and analytic philosophy and become idiot anti-realists who think all thought is theory-laden and that conventions or historical/cultural biases prevent us from even 1% objectivity. Both sides do this, that's how you get Rorty. The analytics started to notice that this is idiotic in the 70s and 80s, the continentals only in the 90s and 2000s (speculative realism), so hopefully in the future bullshit anti-realism will be dead and you'll stop seeing pseuds posting pictures of Wittgenstein or Nietzsche to feel smart.

>analytic philosophy

Attached: 1557010771691.jpg (456x429, 34K)

not really, i just dont waste my life on these things anymore

Analytic and continental aren't useful descriptors, and many of the most important philosophers defy containment within either "tradition."

More helpful would be to describe the actual school of thought that you're talking about. The analytic/continental distinction is metaphilosophy for people who don't know what that is.

Hegel isn't even "Continental", and "psychoanalysis" is barely related.

When did I become the oldest poster on this board?

LMFAO

its just a way to feel comfortable about yourself without engaging in either philosophical discipline

This is how you tell when someone's only exposure to Hegel is through Zizek word-salad videos.

>he thinks anything can ever be coherent beyond personal biases

lol pseud

fpbp

>you're a pseud user h-haha
>t. pseud
Literally bottom of Dunning-Kruger.

You didn't even manage to post the right image.

Attached: Philosophy.jpg (666x408, 67K)

Analytic philosophy seems reasonable until you learn about Moorean facts, the argument from demonstrated success etc

>as I am not an authoritarian Marxist
How goes it, fellow not-commies?

Just as "analytic" philosophy is the farce that occurred when Anglo-Saxons read Nietzsche and tried to understand him and failed, "postmodernism" is what happened when the continental philosophers did the same. Allow me to explain.
There is a before Nietzsche, and an after him. No one before had fully espoused "evil", let alone elevated it above "good": not even the daoist sages, not even Heraclitus. Though he was very good at presenting complex ideas simply, his most valuable ideas were nevertheless terrifically complex. Witness Alain Badiou telling us that doctors create a disease by naming it, then being chased off stage by doctors laughing at his pathetic attempts to explain what that means. The idea is correct, but you have to be a fucking genius to understand it, much less explain it to people, especially to doctors, who will roast your ass over hot coals, as they should, if you are not a complete and total master of the idea. These are such complex conceptions that non-geniuses simply have no hope with them. At best, they grasp one part here, a corollary there, some application to their daily life; but the essence of the idea, and its relationship to all others, remains forever beyond them. Deleuze, Artaud, Bataille: they each grasped some things, and Baudrillard by far the most. The mess of gibberish produced on the continent is the result of their sometimes sincere, sometimes dishonest grasping with these terrifically complex conceptions that Nietzsche bequeathed us, just as the simplistic stupidities of the "analytic" morons is how they dealt with the same stuff. No one would propose that Rorty or Dewey invented their best stuff: it's got N's mark all over it, and they copied it straight off him (and in the instances where they denied him credit, they plagiarized...) Or Adorno and Horkheimer. Or Heidegger. One after another, failed attempts at understanding what N had said. And the HIGHEST ideas of his of all have not even been TOUCHED on. I have yet to read of anyone even MENTIONING his invention of the central ideas of quantum mechanics, decades before the quantum mechanists ran up against them in the lab. Or the Big Bang-Big Crunch cycle decades before the astronomers dreamt it up. I am literally the first person to find these ideas and the beginnings of such ideas in Nietzsche, while everyone else had trouble parsing such simple statements as "men aren't equal". Deleuze was still trying to "deconstruct" that lol (read: convince us that he meant the opposite lol). All this is simply what happens when genius texts fall into the hands of merely above-average intelligences, and the fact that two entire massive traditions — the "analytic", and the "postmodern" — flowed directly from him, is merely a symptom of how vast the power of his intellect was, and therefore, naturally enough, how vast his influence, for better or worse (and in the case of the "analytics" and the "postmoderns", clearly for the worse).

Attached: 1557273376929.jpg (2203x1814, 631K)

>Allow me to explain.

Attached: jJmiG2h.gif (295x221, 554K)

Ok but shouldn't we use philosophy to try to make civilization better. Analytics generally ignores the human side of things

Nietzsche sucks, and you couldn't be more wrong. Analytic and continental philosophy (starting with phenomenology) began because of the anti-psychologism dispute. Frege and Husserl were both anti-psychologism.

Just going to ignore the existence of analytic ethics, analytic political philosophy, and even analytic epistemology (they work on things like epistemic injustice) in favor of continental cultural criticism are we?

Can you recommend some good thinkers or summarize their position?

The pic is fascinating. Historically, continental philosophy is largely a philosophy of critique, but the right side is the one endowed with a bunch of negative non-statements

what do you call the philosophy when two men come greet eachother and come out as better men then they once were and are capable of agreeing and disagreeing with eachother, knowing when they are wrong, and are capable of changing their previous philosophy?

G.E. Moore, W.D. Ross held that moral goodness is irreducible
Korsgaard, Velleman, they are Kantian constructivists (neo-Kantian ethics). Korsgaard's book Self-Constitution is nice.
Philippa Foot, check for her paper "Morality as a System of Hypothetical Imperatives," the title is what it's about. There's Humean constructivists (neo-Humans) too, worth checking out.
Parfit is also important though I only know some of the thought experiments. One of them deals with injustice to one's future self, another with whether we prioritize greater suffering done to us in the past over lesser suffering that will happen to us in the future. Parfit also has some work on continuity of personhood, particularly given amnesia.
Rawls is probably the biggest name for analytic pol phil, and Nozick after that. Rawls can be interpreted as a classical liberal or even a democratic socialist, or as more of a libertarian, depending on what you're after. His main idea is the veil of ignorance/original position thought experiment. Nozick is some kind of a libertarian worth one's time better than Ayn Rand. He's also some kind of a utilitarian, and criticizes some forms (see: the utility monster thought experiment).
Regarding epistemology, I know Zagzebski has a book on epistemic authority which is neat. There's work on epistemic injustice that you can look into as well.
Forgot to mention philosophy of action, don't know much but Harry Frankfurt has some famous "Frankfurt cases" that deal with agency and accountability. Frankfurt also wrote a paper called "On Bullshit" which is all about people who don't give a fuck about truth-telling or lying and go about bullshitting. Thanks to him, "bullshit" is now a technical academic term.

>Just as "analytic" philosophy is the farce that occurred when Anglo-Saxons read Nietzsche and tried to understand him and failed,
The movement was started by a German and many of its significant figures came from the german speaking world early on.

Good, honest philosophy. Intellectual modesty and principle of charity are virtues in philosophy.

Also worth adding is Thomas Nagel, has done some work on existentialism (surprising for an analytic), and also on morality (some work on supererogation), both influenced by his views on subjectivity/objectivity that come out of his philosophy of mind and general attitude of metaphysical realism. He talks about all these things in The View From Nowhere but I know he's got some other books and papers that talk about the ethics/existentialism stuff more, I just haven't read them.

What kind of shit bait is this.

Attached: Based.png (1716x1710, 2.93M)

>Authoritarian Marxist
Imagine being a capitalist while not owning capital.

Attached: 1524542691143.jpg (720x708, 37K)

Krauss and black science man seem completely cucked in this image, but Dawkins first quote seems like a compliment to me, and Nye's just looks like a little pop phil joke.

Dawkins has actually written some interesting books, my favorite being The Ancestor's Tale.

>Baidou
>Huemer
>Scrouton
>Žižek
>Butler
I named 5

>no such thing as social constructs
lmao

>being in touch with one's feelings
>finding room for heroism in the confines of modernity
>having profound foundation shaking thoughts about reality all day
>not afraid to call it like he sees it

This picture was evidently made to ridicule continental philosophy but the only thing the analytic has on the continental here is a full head of hair and I have fantastic hair genetics.

>No one before had fully espoused "evil", let alone elevated it above "good":

Are you retarded? That is certainly not what Nietzsche did with the transvaluation of values... not only does he throw out the concept of moralized evil altogether he does nothing to invert good and bad but merely subjectivizes good in terms of the individual's will to power.

that's somehow more insulting to analytics than continentals

>doesn't know that Hegel is literal embodiment of word-salad

>the argument from demonstrated success
No such thing, please use the correct terminology.

It isn’t

Analytical philosophy emerged roughly at the same time we've invented vaccines. This is not a coincidence.

Attached: UK science chief vaccines cause autism.jpg (1437x1211, 276K)

fpbp

>postmodernism

Stopped reading there. This is a Memerson strawman category that does not exist. This has the same degree of credibility of a guy arguing that Thanos is a threat to our reality.