I enrolled in philosophy and the older students told me the program is analytical focused

I enrolled in philosophy and the older students told me the program is analytical focused
Did I fuck up?

College is analytical-focused.

this.

machine logic works well with the STEM programs but since unis only care about profit these days (mainly in America and GB) that logic is extended to the humanities too. they're gonna shove as much pre-programmed analytical formulas down your throat as possible so they can shove you out with your degree after you've paid them 100k.

if you really want to study radical interesting shit go to germany or france, and only certain schools. or make your way to the phd level and enroll in one of the few CSDS programs in america.

Being well versed in analytic philosophy is essential. They'll go through the early moderns with you (Descartes, Hume, etc.) which is always much better from an analytic point of view. Also logic, ethics, philosophy of mind. Once you're equipped with these you can tackle continental

This, don't listen to

You're off your fucking knob if you think that studying the history of philosophy from the 'analytic point of view' and then continuing onward into the 20th century, studying the likes of Russell and Searle, will 'equip' you to read the continental philosophers. You set yourself up with a massive bias for rigid formulaic philosophy and then seamlessly transition into fucking Deleuze?

Don't pretend like the university system doesn't constrict philosophy into the analytic tradition because it's easier to pre-digest and then reproduce on a test. It's a matter of efficiency, not knowledge. Analytic philosophy is mathematics. If you value causal thinking and calculable results then study the natural sciences.

t. buttmad user who just came off reading Carnap's critique of Heidegger

No, you made the right choice actually. Continentals are retarded

Who was in the wrong here?
Anyways, if I'm going to get analytic autism shoved in my ass, how can I work my way into continental at the same time?
I want to be part of the deleuzeian gang to be desu

But I don't care about being a natural sciences' bitch and steping back into the logic safe space. I'm interested in morality and aesthetics and psychology too ya'know
I see no value in analytic philosophy, can you make me change my mind?

What are continental and analytic philosophy? How many branches are there and what classifies a philosopher to be a part of that branch?

Modern philosophy was a mistake

is this undergraduate level? if so then just read the continentals on your own time. the value in such a course might be that you actually get exposed to it and you'll understand what makes modern philosophers tick. if you already have an instinctual bent toward morals, aesthetics, radical thought and so on, then you'll bring a fiercely critical mind to the studies.

hopefully it doesn't break you.

Google it

The first google result says that today some don't even draw the line between the two but I saw no mention of Greek philosophers, that's why I'm asking.

>hopefully it doesn't break you.
What do you mean?

Yeah at this point analytic and continental mean only a point in the history of philosophy, both movements are really a thing, mainly because of how both evolved.
The analytic/continental division started around the times of hegel and nietzsche, and it became something "official" with Heidegger. Analytic was the reaction towards the word salads of the continentals.
Everything before that was just the "western tradition" aka greeks, descartes, kant.
Learn to google

I had a psychotic my third year of undergrad. I was studying philosophy at an analytic school but a lot of the upper level courses covered continental stuff too. Good times.

Most modern analytics and continentals engage each other even if the dialogue is stunted due to language barriers. Not only is there the tongue of the tome but the intellectual heritage difference. I like both. I am

What made you go psychotic

thanks

LSD, heartbreak, and Plato

Analytic philosophy is not memorizing formulas or whatever you think it is, but there is nothing wrong with using ideas from mathematics to reach a conclusion, considering it's as solid a justification as you can find. tbqh you sound like a brainlet who just can't stand the idea that he might be expected to think or learn something in order to understand philosophy.

Agreed. If anything it'll help you engage more lucidly with continental texts.

>understand philosophy.
How does the "making philosophy" part work in the analytic club?

Sincere engagement with the canon to comment upon, argue for or against, or propose a certain way of thinking. As is philosophy.

You worried if you learn how to spot logical fallacies you won't be able to enjoy French wordwank anymore?

>2k18
>still bickering about continental vs analytical like thugs from the eastside and the westside

They're both pretty great m8. The downside of analytical philosophy is its tendency towards autism and trivialities. The downside of continental philosophy is its tendency towards obscurantism and insanity.

Just steer clear of the shit in both camps and you will become a well-rounded student OP.

I have been through stuff you could call psychotic thanks to psychedelics and a tendency of mine towards mental fuckery thanks to what they call "bipolar disorder". I wish I had been into philosophy in those times so I could had formalized whatever it was that was going on those moments.

Not much to formalize. I got mad delusional. Thought I was in a rocket ship in space about to be space jesus to a new world in the psych ward for a day or two and then the medicine kicked in and I was just desparate to get out. Had a few subsequent experiences. Wasn't taking meds. Eventually I got on them for good. At first, l considered changing my major because psychiatric medicine had helped me where philosophy didn't but I find philosophy is kinda therapeutic in a way like psychotherapy and both have their place in the world. I suffered an unlucky organic disturbance. The medicind helped with that. I wish to grow and flourish. Philosophy helps with that.

>Sincere engagement with the canon to comment upon, argue for or against, or propose a certain way of thinking. As is philosophy.
Then what is the main difference between analytic and continental?
I'm not trying to be smartass btw
>You worried if you learn how to spot logical fallacies you won't be able to enjoy French wordwank anymore?
No. What worries me is that analytic seems to have a slower approach towards itself (philosophy as they understand it) just to arrive at the same conclusions continentals or the western tradition already did. The only reason to it to exist seems to be born out of an ilogical repulsion towards the german-french "wordwank", of which I'm not a fan of because of how obscure it gets, but I can get behind the mindset of using language in different ways.
But I'm sure this is an outdated vision, I guess that at this point there must be some analytic/continental crossovers.

>You set yourself up with a massive bias for rigid formulaic philosophy and then seamlessly transition into fucking Deleuze?

Literally no one said this. You would've known this if you learned how to formulate arguments in school.

>Analytic philosophy is mathematics

kek, things would be so much easier if this were the case.

Analytic can lead to autism in excess. Just like how continental in excess can lead to wordwank.

>kek, things would be so much easier if this were the case.
>philosophy is easier than math
wat?

>just to arrive at the same conclusions continentals or the western tradition already did

That's a pretty huge generalization. Care to give any examples?

if you want to do continental you should do media theory or literary theory. I know at least at my university the German department does a lot of continental work

Easier in the sense that we'd have more agreed upon truths, less difficulty interpreting each others' arguments, fewer vague murky areas that are difficult to systematize, fewer places for us to smuggle in our biases.

I'm aware math has its own controversies but overall it is far more systematized. It also doesn't need to interface with many other fields to establish its truths. (Hell, the fact that it CAN establish truth (at least within its own systems) is something philosophy envies.) Everything you need to know about math is contained within its field, as compared with philosophy where empirical study (however shaky) is often necessary to undergird arguments.

>Hell, the fact that it CAN establish truth (at least within its own systems) is something philosophy envies.)
*uses truth to clean his schizophrenic ass and throws it into the trash*
Pshh, will to power, kiddo...

Basically philosophy tackles fundamentally unsolvable problems while math (in theory) can resolve its own paradoxes with enough study.

Metaphysics

Care to give any examples?