Give me a rundown on this

Give me a rundown on this

Attached: 71OsS+ePZFL.jpg (1400x2132, 238K)

Other urls found in this thread:

youtu.be/BHztIS9kdVY
youtu.be/zDy_ayF_QKE
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

OP = a moron

Attached: 1545340144886.jpg (1024x962, 48K)

Reality is a process.

Bump

Has anyone read him since the memeing?

I have

Give a rundown. What’s he all about?

youtu.be/BHztIS9kdVY
youtu.be/zDy_ayF_QKE

dude becoming lmao
Read Leibniz instead, and in mere tens of pages reach enlightenment

Bump

>Ontological pluralism
Did Bookchin mention this guy in The Ecology of Freedom?
I approve

Attached: A882CE1C-C307-4C3F-9C04-1AE9884A82DB.jpg (562x800, 74K)

i just picked up this book at the thrift store

GOD IS AN INTENSITY ENGINE

DEATH IS THE CONDITION OF BEAUTY

THE ONLY IMMORTALITY IS THE PERMANENCE OF THE GRAVESTONE

THE PARENT IS EXHAUSTED LIKE A WAVE ON AN EMBATTLED SHORE, SO THE CHILD MIGHT BECOME WHAT ONLY THE DEAD CAN MAKE HIM

UNTIL THE CHILD, TOO, BECOMES THE GRIST OF THE FUTURE

Attached: ww.jpg (236x253, 11K)

For how much I post about him, I'll concede that it's a little weird to not also have an interest in explaining him. The issue is simple: people aren't usually equipped for Whitehead. Hegel is like a raging bull, you'll never tame him on your own, and people already despise Mainländer/etc enough for him to be safely slipped in. Whitehead? He's a fragile thinker, one of the near perfects, and I have no intention of swinging him around like the sturdy and well-forged Mainländer or the heavy and unwieldy Hegel.

dude becoming lmao

Bump

Bump

Well, can you comment on the videos above

Attached: 21BDA420-6EF0-4D14-A718-A38B3D51789B.jpg (800x530, 98K)

getting rid of your pimples is not of the end point of their disappearance, but the process of overcoming your insecurities whether you have them or not. have sex

Pussy, you have to break your toys to understand what they can do. If you don't expose Whitehead's philosophy to devil-may-care superfluous second order shitposting, you are never going to understand it's restraints and redundancies. It's didactic cybernetics. It worked for me with Peirce, I'm doing it right now with some shit I read earlier.

Oh don't get ahead of yourself now, I've introduced more of his work than you'd know. You're right that the only way to understand a philosophy is to see it broken; still, it would be unfortunate to see it misunderstood to the point of uselessness, and I haven't found the niche for Whitehead (again, he's more of a breastplate in search of a full suit than a sword [M] or a hammer [H]).