Rolling Philosophy

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (807 of them)

robin hanson, man, that dude...

goole, Wednesday, 16 June 2010 18:30 (3 years ago) Permalink

implacably insane, in a good way

goole, Wednesday, 16 June 2010 18:31 (3 years ago) Permalink

"analytic philosophy can be a pain in the ass to get into & it tends to be kinda "deflating" rather than ~mystical~ or ~political~ "

whoa this sounds like such a drag

plax (ico), Wednesday, 16 June 2010 18:33 (3 years ago) Permalink

Did analytic philosophy at university and critical theory at MA level, so I have time for both sides of the discipline. Moving more towards literary theory these days, though, so I'm interested in hearing the logicians' debate on this thread.

emil.y, Wednesday, 16 June 2010 18:35 (3 years ago) Permalink

logic rules & I'm supposed to write something on it for a "general audience" later this year & when I do I may bounce it off ILX b/c tbh I could use feedback on it from non-specialists...gonna be a few months though.

Euler, Wednesday, 16 June 2010 18:39 (3 years ago) Permalink

analytic/continental divide is boring -- there's good stuff on both sides

― ksh, Wednesday, June 16, 2010 7:22 PM (57 minutes ago) Bookmark

h8 this approach to... everything really

ultra nate dogg (history mayne), Wednesday, 16 June 2010 19:22 (3 years ago) Permalink

kinda like

imo

ultra nate dogg (history mayne), Wednesday, 16 June 2010 19:30 (3 years ago) Permalink

lol buddhism?

Mordy, Wednesday, 16 June 2010 19:41 (3 years ago) Permalink

nah like judeo-christio-buddho-hindu-islamo-shinto-donkey-wheelism, aka 'the best bits of everything'

ultra nate dogg (history mayne), Wednesday, 16 June 2010 19:50 (3 years ago) Permalink

LOST

ULTRAMAN dat ho (jjjusten), Wednesday, 16 June 2010 19:53 (3 years ago) Permalink

I just meant the circled thing isn't donkey wheelism, it's buddhism.

Mordy, Wednesday, 16 June 2010 19:53 (3 years ago) Permalink

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dharmacakra

Mordy, Wednesday, 16 June 2010 19:53 (3 years ago) Permalink

oh hah i hadnt even looked at the image, i was just having a kneejerk response to all those words in a row

ULTRAMAN dat ho (jjjusten), Wednesday, 16 June 2010 19:55 (3 years ago) Permalink

they are not reborn in lost i think

plax (ico), Wednesday, 16 June 2010 19:56 (3 years ago) Permalink

i thought that was why the nope

plax (ico), Wednesday, 16 June 2010 19:56 (3 years ago) Permalink

cos its like, pan-religiousy in a fucking marshmallowy meaningless way.

is the point

plax (ico), Wednesday, 16 June 2010 19:57 (3 years ago) Permalink

philosophy

plax (ico), Wednesday, 16 June 2010 19:57 (3 years ago) Permalink

man

plax (ico), Wednesday, 16 June 2010 19:57 (3 years ago) Permalink

ho shit. i thought the donkey-wheel was just meta.

n e ways, plaxico otm

ultra nate dogg (history mayne), Wednesday, 16 June 2010 19:59 (3 years ago) Permalink

yeah, interdisciplinary work is so fruitless

ksh, Wednesday, 16 June 2010 20:04 (3 years ago) Permalink

even if you don't consider analytic and continental philosophy to be two separate disciplines—maybe they are, and maybe they aren't—saying that you need to take sides doesn't really make much sense. not saying you can just take random aspects of the two and mash them together, but if you notice a place where the two lines up, you certainly can link them together and work from there

ksh, Wednesday, 16 June 2010 20:06 (3 years ago) Permalink

seems like u r def. the man to do that good look

plax (ico), Wednesday, 16 June 2010 20:08 (3 years ago) Permalink

btw, lol that ILX Philosophy thread started discussing Lost less than 50 posts in

Mordy, Wednesday, 16 June 2010 20:18 (3 years ago) Permalink

Ugh, maybe I won't be looking forward to this thread as I had initially thought. Fucking assholes coming out of the woodwork already.

I don't believe that analytic and continental disciplines can ever be reduced into each other, and nor should they, but to suggest that they cannot both be appreciated is the most disgusting savagery.

emil.y, Wednesday, 16 June 2010 23:56 (3 years ago) Permalink

I don't think those people are assholes.

bamcquern, Thursday, 17 June 2010 00:57 (3 years ago) Permalink

Analyze the disgusting savage archetype?

Mordy, Thursday, 17 June 2010 00:59 (3 years ago) Permalink

I'm just going to treat this as the rolling talk about academics thread, fuck distinctions imo

dyao, Thursday, 17 June 2010 01:05 (3 years ago) Permalink

anyway, picked up history of sexuality part I, it's actually my first full on foucault book instead of a few scattered essays and excerpts here and there. have only read the prologue but excited

dyao, Thursday, 17 June 2010 01:05 (3 years ago) Permalink

not wanting to put you off or anything, but dunno if history of sexuality is the best place to start w/ foucault - i think it's one of his most esoteric and least satisfying bks, tbh. for me, discipline and punish was a really gd intro to his thought and style - works as a piece of theory and as (obv contentious) history

Ward Fowler, Thursday, 17 June 2010 06:39 (3 years ago) Permalink

i am so goddamn out of touch w/philosphy these days, i am a bad philo grad. it bugs me, because i think ive lost a lot of what i already knew just through not engaging with it, kind of a tough discipline if you dont stay on top of it.

― ULTRAMAN dat ho (jjjusten), Wednesday, June 16, 2010 1:41 PM (Yesterday) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

^^^^ I double majored and am working in the field of my other major so yeah, I'm stupid again so to speak. Hopefully this thread will bring back that loving feeling of my brain turning inside out.

peacocks, Thursday, 17 June 2010 18:09 (3 years ago) Permalink

i found history of sexuality I quite satisfying and not as hard to get through as d&p

harbl, Thursday, 17 June 2010 18:14 (3 years ago) Permalink

i read this really good book called the fountanhead once

michael, Thursday, 17 June 2010 18:19 (3 years ago) Permalink

wat was it about?

peacocks, Thursday, 17 June 2010 20:39 (3 years ago) Permalink

how awesome awesome people are

Mordy, Thursday, 17 June 2010 20:44 (3 years ago) Permalink

i think it was about rape and architecture, kinda like Discipline & Punish, only longer.

sarahel, Thursday, 17 June 2010 20:50 (3 years ago) Permalink

yeah i woulda said history of sexuality was totally perfect intro to foucault, kinda feel like its both the most developed and clearest version of many of his tropes etc.

plax (ico), Thursday, 17 June 2010 21:32 (3 years ago) Permalink

the Foucault lecture courses that have been coming out in english translation over the past few years are also great -- I find the lecture format really easy to follow (not that Foucault's other books are particularly offensive in this regard; just sayin'), and there's a lot of great stuff in there

INSUFFICIENT FUN (bernard snowy), Thursday, 17 June 2010 21:48 (3 years ago) Permalink

lately my reading has been directed more toward early-20th century european philosophy (phenomenology, Diltheyan hermeneutics, various neo-Kantianisms) in an effort to get a better grasp on the origins of the main postwar intellectual (and some political) movements. and maybe to finally understand Heidegger, but I'm not holding my breath.

INSUFFICIENT FUN (bernard snowy), Thursday, 17 June 2010 21:51 (3 years ago) Permalink

plax (ico), Thursday, 17 June 2010 21:55 (3 years ago) Permalink

ha, was just about to post that. It's funny because it's true.

I'm currently doing my Masters dissertation in (continental) philosophy, fuck it all I say I'll just get a cosy office job. Altho my reading at this very moment is fun, Jacques Attali's Noise: The Political Economy of Music.

NYC Goatse.cx and Flowers (Merdeyeux), Thursday, 17 June 2010 22:00 (3 years ago) Permalink

really makes me want to read hegel and hausel to understand late heidegger to understand derrida (kinda thought socrates was supposed to be the key to derrida though)

plax (ico), Thursday, 17 June 2010 22:03 (3 years ago) Permalink

That clip is amazing. Also -- loved the Attali. A lot of my undergrad thesis was devoted to him.

Mordy, Thursday, 17 June 2010 22:05 (3 years ago) Permalink

xpost oh yeah I'm also hoping that, after reading some Husserl, I'll be able to (and still want to, heh) read Derrida's early stuff on him and maybe get a better understanding of JD's whole project

INSUFFICIENT FUN (bernard snowy), Thursday, 17 June 2010 22:08 (3 years ago) Permalink

husserl is awesome but the phenomenological aspects of derrida are crazy confusing to me

plax (ico), Thursday, 17 June 2010 22:13 (3 years ago) Permalink

I saw this thread title and initially thought it would be about best approaches to throwing the D20 in a role playing game.

he's always been a bit of an anti-climb Max (jon /via/ chi 2.0), Thursday, 17 June 2010 22:14 (3 years ago) Permalink

man that clip is my h8ed approach to... everything really. "You can't understand x without y, z, or q". You could say that in any academic discipline, or any non-academic discipline. Fuck it. Secondary texts ftw.

btw another mostly lapsed MA here, although I keep up my subscription to The Philospher's Magazine.

sent from my neural lace (ledge), Thursday, 17 June 2010 22:18 (3 years ago) Permalink

plax what's yr favorite husserl? I'm reading crisis of the european sciences right now but that's obv. a very late and not very representative work so I'm wonderin' what I should check out next.

INSUFFICIENT FUN (bernard snowy), Thursday, 17 June 2010 22:21 (3 years ago) Permalink

i read the cartesian meditations recently enough and its a pretty sweet intro.

plax (ico), Thursday, 17 June 2010 22:24 (3 years ago) Permalink

the Foucault lecture courses that have been coming out in english translation over the past few years are also great -- I find the lecture format really easy to follow (not that Foucault's other books are particularly offensive in this regard; just sayin'), and there's a lot of great stuff in there

― INSUFFICIENT FUN (bernard snowy), Thursday, June 17, 2010 5:48 PM (36 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

YES--birth of biopolitics is GREAT i think, not to mention the clearest/'easiest' of any foucault book ive read too.

max, Thursday, 17 June 2010 22:26 (3 years ago) Permalink

really makes me want to read hegel and hausel to understand late heidegger to understand derrida (kinda thought socrates was supposed to be the key to derrida though)

― plax (ico), Thursday, June 17, 2010 6:03 PM (23 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

i thought levinas was the key to derrida

max, Thursday, 17 June 2010 22:27 (3 years ago) Permalink

while I'm struggling to sleep I'm going to share a story I remembered earlier today, which I think I read in some '70s book on Whitehead a few years ago though I haven't been able to locate it again* - apparently when he was at Cambridge, so some time in first decade of the 1900s, Whitehead had an academic role that involved selecting books to be translated into English. Among the books that was suggested was Husserl's Logical Investigations, but Whitehead passed it over, knowing only the title and having little to distinguish it from the slew of other books with similar titles at the time. He much later learned about Husserl's work, saw the resonance with what he and his colleagues were doing at that time and beyond, and regretted not ordering the translation, but ultimately I don't think Husserl was translated at all until the '60s. By which time of course the gap between post-Fregeans and post-Husserlians was well-developed and only set to expand further. So we can safely blame Whitehead, polymath, pluralist, and tireless bridger of gaps, for bringing about the break between analytic and continental philosophy.

*so, forgive my misrememberings

ohmigud (Merdeyeux), Thursday, 23 May 2013 01:04 (3 weeks ago) Permalink

wow! that's a really cool story--i had no idea Husserl wasn't translated until the 60s.

ryan, Thursday, 23 May 2013 01:06 (3 weeks ago) Permalink

a history of philosophy read through the vagaries of available translations would make for a fun read, though i don't imagine anyone's too desperate to set out working on it. e.g. i've heard people suggest that the standard readings of kierkegaard are bizarrely warped because they come filtered through philosophers who were reading french translations of bad german translations of the danish, misunderstandings accumulating everywhere along the way.

ohmigud (Merdeyeux), Thursday, 23 May 2013 01:15 (3 weeks ago) Permalink

looking it up a bit more i see that there were some translations of husserl in the '30s, but most of it went untouched, logical investigations not appearing in english till 1970.

ohmigud (Merdeyeux), Thursday, 23 May 2013 01:17 (3 weeks ago) Permalink

yeah id be very interested in a study like that. spending as i do a lot of time in peirce studies it's really interesting to see the reception of his thought go through stages as more things became available and inevitably filtered through the historical moment it arrives in.

ryan, Thursday, 23 May 2013 01:17 (3 weeks ago) Permalink

amongst philosophers in the English-speaking world in the first half of the 20th century, though, German proficiency was standard, so I don't think the lack of translation is quite the problem you're suggesting

especially given how tricky Husserl is to translating.

& in the German and Polish-speaking worlds, also critical in the "break", this was def no problem. Carnap & Gödel knew their Husserl.

that's all to say, I don't think the "break" was chiefly a linguistic problem.

cf. http://www.amazon.com/Parting-Ways-Cassirer-Heidegger-ebook/dp/B004XOZ892

Euler, Thursday, 23 May 2013 08:11 (3 weeks ago) Permalink

yeah i slightly overstate the case for joekz, but these historical contingencies are interesting nevertheless. and there's also something of just having the literature readily available, as in the case of bergson and husserl, who didn't really seem to bother to become aware of each other beyond second hand information until quite late in their lives.

ohmigud (Merdeyeux), Thursday, 23 May 2013 12:10 (3 weeks ago) Permalink

it's still the case in France today that scholars here are frequently ignorant of what scholars are doing in other countries. again, it's not the language: they've that under control. but there's a "village" aspect to French intellectual life, wherein you study the works of contemporaries in your village, communicated largely through conferences but also through writings; & you don't venture outside this. it's what the French call "localisme". in Paris this means that you might not even know about the work being done by someone across town, or even down the street (if you're working in the 5th or 6th). & you don't really *want* to! you certainly don't *need* to in order to get by; for these villages are self-sustaining in terms of publishing, giving conferences...& yes, getting & giving jobs (though the nationalization of job hiring committees has somewhat mitigated that).

my understanding is that this "provinciality" is not new to France; that it was in place in the era you're talking about.

Euler, Thursday, 23 May 2013 12:25 (3 weeks ago) Permalink

in the face of being wrong (not that I'm wrong wrong but you're quite right that France was a special case for that kind of academic factionalism even before it became the unfortunate standard in philosophy) I'm going to go with default internet protocol and respond with some cats:

http://binarythis.wordpress.com/2013/05/23/judith-butler-explained-with-cats/

ohmigud (Merdeyeux), Friday, 24 May 2013 00:27 (3 weeks ago) Permalink

so I thought I'd update everyone on my book. It was rejected last summer by the first press I sent it too. I just spend about 5 months doing heavy revisions and streamlining it and basically just improving the flow of it. very surprisingly got my proposal accepted by an even better university press and they even seem pretty enthusiastic about it. I'll send the full manuscript in a few weeks. so cross your fingers for me.

so chances at getting a book published have *slightly* improved but still gotta run the gauntlet of grouchy reviewers.

but I swear the learning curve of this process should be worth another degree at least!

ryan, Friday, 24 May 2013 18:26 (3 weeks ago) Permalink

wrote that on my phone so that's my excuse this time for poor grammar and spelling. this time.

ryan, Friday, 24 May 2013 18:27 (3 weeks ago) Permalink

cool man, congrats

goole, Friday, 24 May 2013 18:28 (3 weeks ago) Permalink

well done sir

the league against cool sports (Noodle Vague), Friday, 24 May 2013 18:31 (3 weeks ago) Permalink

thanks guys. obviously I may still not get this thing off the ground but I thought it would be fun to share the process.

One of the previous two reviewers was totally brutal though. To the point I could only read his response one time and then had to delete it. The other was very encouraging and really helped me.

ryan, Friday, 24 May 2013 18:31 (3 weeks ago) Permalink

very nice! good luck!

ohmigud (Merdeyeux), Friday, 24 May 2013 18:41 (3 weeks ago) Permalink

wtf r u on about husserl fuk u.

ohmigud (Merdeyeux), Sunday, 26 May 2013 20:27 (3 weeks ago) Permalink

sounds like u got some bracketing to do son

j., Sunday, 26 May 2013 20:30 (3 weeks ago) Permalink

ya gonna go for a classic and completely illegitimate "details of this are beyond the scope of this discussion" and move on.

ohmigud (Merdeyeux), Sunday, 26 May 2013 20:32 (3 weeks ago) Permalink

work for another project!

j., Sunday, 26 May 2013 20:32 (3 weeks ago) Permalink

philosophy needs to develop a textual mark like a black box or something that stands for "here is where my understanding of this idea would go if I had any understanding of it, which I don't."

ryan, Sunday, 26 May 2013 22:50 (3 weeks ago) Permalink

cavell has a whole repertoire of ways to do that

j., Sunday, 26 May 2013 22:54 (3 weeks ago) Permalink

lol.

i do notice that the older and more revered a philosopher you are the more you can get away with "and this part i dont understand but I'm gonna keep going on with this train of thought."

ryan, Sunday, 26 May 2013 22:58 (3 weeks ago) Permalink

yeah that's methodologically tricky. I don't see it as merely a matter of prestige, but instead chiefly as something you're allowed to do if the phenomenon you're talking about is acknowledged to be really hard & really interesting. if you do good work you end up implicitly defining what you're talking about, through the context you provide.

Euler, Sunday, 26 May 2013 23:06 (3 weeks ago) Permalink

I decided to be more intellectually honest and I'VE TAKEN THREE HOURS TO WRITE 500 WORDS.

Good thing with my next section I can be more like "here's some shite off the top of my head, you haven't read the stuff I'm talking about so I can say what I want."

ohmigud (Merdeyeux), Sunday, 26 May 2013 23:12 (3 weeks ago) Permalink

intellectual honesty is going to get you nowhere

j., Monday, 27 May 2013 02:09 (3 weeks ago) Permalink

http://movies.nytimes.com/2013/05/29/movies/hannah-arendt-with-barbara-sukowa-and-janet-mcteer.html?hpw

Arendt is a more challenging cinematic portrait. Her outwardly bookish existence challenges the ancient distinction between active and contemplative ways of living, but the work of thinking is notoriously difficult to show. In this case, it looks a lot like smoking, with intervals of typing, pacing or staring at the ceiling from a daybed in the study.

Still, I would not hesitate to describe “Hannah Arendt” as an action movie, though of a more than usually dialectical type. Its climax, in which Arendt defends herself against critics, matches some of the great courtroom scenes in cinema and provides a stirring reminder that the labor of figuring out the world is necessary, difficult and sometimes genuinely heroic.

lol, verite

j., Wednesday, 29 May 2013 17:26 (3 weeks ago) Permalink

i think that's a book a friend recommended to me, it sounds great

the league against cool sports (Noodle Vague), Wednesday, 29 May 2013 19:44 (3 weeks ago) Permalink


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.