Ludwig Wittgenstein, Gottlob Frege, Bertrand Russell, AJ Ayer and Saul Kripke are all commonly thought to be autistic

>Ludwig Wittgenstein, Gottlob Frege, Bertrand Russell, AJ Ayer and Saul Kripke are all commonly thought to be autistic
What does this say about analytic philosphy??

No offense but Wittgenstein abandoned the analytic tradition.

Entirely autistic. I mean, look at how they write their papers.

>I will understand idealism broadly, as the thesis that the universe is fundamentally mental, or perhaps that all concrete facts are grounded in mental facts.
>But anti-realist idealism makes
a stronger claim connecting the nature of any nonmental reality to the specific content of appearances:
roughly, for any nonmental fact p about concrete reality, what it is for p to obtain is for appearances that p (or closely related appearances) to obtain. (Chalmers)

God I hate it. I'd rather suffer reading Deleuze's books than to read an entire book written in this style.

>No offense but Wittgenstein abandoned the analytic tradition.
Do you honestly think ordinary language philosophy is continental??!?

No he didnt. He just went and did something that wasnt logical analysis in first order logic

>suffer reading Deleuze's books
Deleuze is the most powerful philosopher ever

Are you just sad he didn't bless us with a Hegel book

People really have difficulty with specificity and consistency huh? I dont understand how people cant see the beauty in how a work can be produced in this way, rather than being poetic in the usual sense of words sounding well together

yo you should be shot man you’re a piece of shit cretin and you should leave this board

It says little about analytic philosophy. It speaks volumes as to the average man's capacity for logic and mathematics however.

No way in hell Russell and Ayer were autistic, they were charismatic as hell.

You just don't care about philosophy. You read philosophy like people read fiction.

I find it fascinating, you're just a loser.

Was autism even a thing back then?

wtf i hate it when things make sense

What's the problem?

whys that?
pomo french phil and pedo predilection go hand in hand

elaborate please

>positivists
>not autistic

Autism superpower 2020

I've really come to dislike the ultra-specialized, article mass-production quality of analytic philosophy. What made (and still does to an extent) european philosophy compelling to read was the wide-ranging net of interests it covers, including social and political developments as well as traditional questions of metaphysics and epistemology. Also, the major texts were mostly published in self-contained books that form a coherent canon of dialogue.
Then you get to analytic philosophy, and it becomes a bunch of academic disciplines that operate almost separately from each other, each doing their own thing and making incremental trends across a bunch of journal articles, many of which are hard to obtain. Sure, occasionally someone writes an overview or a textbook, but it basically looks to me like you have to devote your whole career to penetrate the discussion.
Call me a brainlet but I'd much rather sit down with a book that attempts the next hegelian synthesis of the 21st century.

>I've really come to dislike the ultra-specialized, article mass-production quality of analytic philosophy
literally what's the point

only other analytic philosophers read that shit