Will studying analytic philosophy in college ruin my creative writing skills...

It is awful by all means. Shallow, uninteresting and ultimately pointless. Just read a few exemplary contemporary analytic philosophy papers and you'll see what I'm talking about. The vast majority of people on Veeky Forums who praise analytic philosophy have read close to zero of it and therefore base their opinion on the illusion that analytic philosophy is "rational", "scientific" and consequently that it "answers certain questions". This warped view can only be acquired by an individual who, as I already said, has not read enough analytic philosophy to base an educated opinion on it. The actual state of affairs is the very opposite - analytical philosophy fails on all accounts.

I am an undergraduate philosophy student and the professors are force feeding us this garbage all the time. It is beyond depressing - reading *anything* else would be more insightful. I suggest you to read a few short texts from the field of epistemology by some of the prominent contemporary authors - Goldman and Lehrer for instance.

any arguments against it other than random insults?

He's an undergrad.

Yeah. Logicians are more like computer programmers than philosophers. Some analytic philosophy is slightly better but only because it rips off shit from continental thinkers 80 years ago.

contemporary analytic applied/normative/metaethics is fascinating though

of course epistemology is boring you goof

ethics is the worst field though...

There's nothing less insightful than continental meanderings about power.

interesting, you made an evaluative statement about a field solely concerned with evaluation

it's oughts all the way down buddy

and besides, moral philosophy is the most "practical" or "relevant" branch of philosophy, which should appeal to a brainlet like you

It's not retarded, just not very good. There are insights there and some questions that the continental tradition should also ask, but the work is typically very boring and only concerns itself with ground-level syllogisms. They have very undeveloped notions of, for example, freedom and are seemingly unable to produce works of genuine creativity.

Probably not. Logic is a different way of thinking that has to be deliberately practiced to get anything out of it. It will make handling abstractions easier, and will make you pay extremely close attention to what you write, especially when you translate natural language sentences into symbolic logic. Most of this takes place at the beginning of a study of logic.

As for analytic philosophy, I don't know and I don't care. My brother was an analytic philosopher and said they all smoked weed and had an inferiority complex with regards to people who actually do science. Like, they'd go to a conference about something other than philosophy and feel bad about how they'd been spending their time.

He studies biostats in grad school now, and every few weeks goes on another rant about how pathetic philosophers tend to be lol.

>My brother was an analytic philosopher and said they all smoked weed and had an inferiority complex with regards to people who actually do science.
analytics are the most beta people I've ever met

analytic philosophy of mind is to continental philosophy of mind like peewee baseball is to roided out superhulks smashing balls into the stratosphere

analytics have NO game

I think it's interesting and also ultimately masturbatory

Lmao

On another note, did anyone watch that DFW movie. Was it any good?