Who are your favourite philosophers?

[entertainment]

This is why I like fiction that tussles with philosophy. It makes it that bit easier. Burroughs or Pynchon saying something that overlaps with Deleuze is more likely to give me a handle on the thing being discussed than reading Deleuze himself. DeLillo talking about the media and the image is more likely to get through to me than Baudrillard.

The use of analogies is essential for me when it gets abstract.

 

[luka]

me too. but often they scorn the analogy on principle

 

[luka]

they feel the anaalgy is debasing and the abstract language is closer to the truth of it. maybe it is

 

[version]

They should just become mathematicians then, surely? That's closer to 'the truth' than words.

 

[luka]

language as a kind of austere mathematics

 

[constant escape]

Well somethings always lost in translation, no? With analogies.

 

[luka]

s n a p

 

[entertainment]

Nietszche has those poetic articulations of his ideas, they bloom naturally in your head. Compared to the austere official precision style, it's much more engaging.

 

[luka]

Well somethings always lost in translation, no? With analogies.

this, i think, is the argument.

 

[entertainment]

All those philosophers forgot to put it in their own words. We learned this in 4th grade man come on!

 

[version]

All those philosophers forgot to put it in their own words. We learned this in 4th grade man come on!

The endless referencing. I noticed this in an essay in my copy of Ulysses. Every other line was attributed to another scholar.

 

[entertainment]

Who are everyone's least favourite philosophers?

stoics I think, haven't come close to reading anything but it smells ugly

 

[luka]

i'm anti dialectic

 

[luka]

anti hegel anti marx.

 

[version]

i'm anti dialectic

Maybe see a doctor?

 

[luka]

i dont even know what it is. but i know in my bones i dont like it

 

[constant escape]

I think the mistake there is treating dialectics as if it were a metaphysical mechanism animating the cosmos, rather than a sublimely useful way of understanding the cosmos.

 

[constant escape]

But it's been tough, for me at least, to bracket dialectics like that.

 

[linebaugh]

@Linebaugh

Notice any particularly pronounced changes Anti Oedipus made on your reading of things?

I'm just beginning to understand schizoanalysis.

I think the the best way to get AO is to just read essays/articles on random shit that take a deluzean approach and then return to the actual book.Not that I get it, I probably dont, but when reading CR, I think if I hadnt read a little AO I would have a less grasp on why networks and logics are so binding.

 

[entertainment]

I'm not a fan of those who say that reality is all in your head.

Kant’s transcendental idealism was a modest philosophical doctrine about the difference between appearances and things in themselves, which claimed that the objects of human cognition are appearances and not things in themselves. Fichte, Schelling, and Hegel radicalized this view, transforming Kant’s transcendental idealism into absolute idealism, which holds that things in themselves are a contradiction in terms, because a thing must be an object of our consciousness if it is to be an object at all.

This makes no sense to me. It's so far from how I experience existence. Also seems boring.