Is philosophy in modern academia unphilosophic?

Sup Veeky Forumstorians. Long time considering doing a masters in philosophy and then a Ph.D, but the more I study philosophy and the more I see what academia is, the less that academia looks like a place for philosophy

It seems to me like modern academia has degenerated into a "who has more cardboards and from a better manufacturer" competition with less and less emphasis on actual philosophy. At the same time I see more and more the credentials being as a justifying principle rather than the arguments and logics

Metaphysics and ontology are less and less studied and social problematics seem to be the main point in modern philosophy

I'm thinking more of going for self publishing platforms and writing rather than academia itself, which depresses me even more after seeing people like Nietzsche or Spengler who were at first ignored or rejected by academia, yet them being now praised by the same institution

What are your thoughts on modern philosophy? Do you see it in decadence as well?

>What are your thoughts on modern philosophy?
Sophistry.

You're right

Bump

this is true

Every late stage empire goes into a period of extreme skepticism and "its all relative, dude!"

ie the greeks with sophism, the indians with buddhism, the muslims with sufism, etc.

philosophy is like art. the hierarchy of quality arranged by the consumers of the material is not what those who create said material are ultimately concerned with
to be a philo-soph (lover of thought/wisdom) one is interested in the realm of thought first and foremost, the fabrications of those who undestand it from a distance is simply that: a fabrication for their own purposes
it is natural that schools are filled with sophists (those who wish to understand thought/wisdom for some utility) thats basically the whole point of going to school, this isn't even taking into account how curriculums get messed up when air headed lefties come in teaching feel-goodery and nonsense
this is not to write off what's done in universities, but if you (as someone who is claiming to be interested in publishing without regard form traditional methods/institutions of merit) are interested solely in the forefront of thought the university is never a good place to be

also, if you're interested in modern "philosophers" there's things like "orgy of the will" and that autismo thing

tl;dr the point of the university is essentially to follow thinkers closely and to posthumously arrange them in terms of relevance

This is true. Academic treatment of philosophy sucks ass

How many years until the West collapses then? I was thinking it'll be 40-50 years but is it closer to 20-30?

according to spengler, 2100

Kant BTFO

>degradation of abstract thinking into professional lecture-room philosophy
Uhhh guys...

it depends on what one is looking for. of course academia is no place to acquire real knowledge, but that is nothing new. however, if you have some sort of aspiration as a writer or something like that then it is clearly necessary to play its game.

i dont think one needs philosophy if one is able to tolerate academia, and anyhow academia wont tolerate you if you start doing your own philosophy.

there is no decadence in any of this. just look closer and fix those expectations.

We need a new Socrates to defeat them

Bump

but sophistry is not necessarily a bad. A well spoken or written advocacy delights the mind and fosters understanding and inspires debate.

That's nothing if they use it for the sake of a non argument

what's wrong with indian buddhism?

>DESIGNATED path to enlightenment

>for. of course academia is no place to acquire real knowledge
t.underage or college dropout. I’m getting a history major currently reading centuries old primary text and fairly advanced analysis on them. many of which from the school library date from the 50s and 60s. People who aren’t in the field and think the humanities is all gender studies and post-modernism really don’t have a clue. I can still find much better knowledge at my unis library then on the internet.

Let's play a game, everyone

1. Go to the free Stanford philosophy encyclopedia website
2. Go to a random article
3. Ctrl + f or 'find'
4. Type 'her' or 'she' and count how many times they're purposefully used instead of his, he, their and they

This is not a joke

Well two things have essentially destroyed academic philosophy. The first is mathematics and science in general. The increasing technicity of the world makes philosophy seem like a worthless pursuit because when science and scientific thinking invades all spaces a tendency towards utilitarianism in everything is preferred. This is of course also in part because of capitalism.

Secondly, post-structuralist and post-modern critiques of the Enlightenment essentially destroyed what respect people had for the ancients and their wisdom. With the exception of certain thinkers who embody a spirit of deconstruction(Nietzsche, et.al), almost the entirety of the philosophical canon is viewed as just a bunch of old white men who wrote down philosophical justifications for why their societies were the best, and how to keep subjugating everyone, and privileging themselves.

Furthermore, there is a marked reductionism in postmodernity. Everything is reduced to the individual, everything is reduced to the "atomic", and pin-point narratives of race, gender, ethnicity or sexuality are viewed as on equal footing with grander, and more "humanistic" narratives, even though the reductionism itself means that you cannot generalize, and create modes of being which can be taken seriously by large amounts of people.

>old white men
the wisest and most worthy of respect.

t. has literally no idea what postmodernism is

I would say History is one of the least corrupted humanities department out there.

That being said, they are a lot of leftist historians that love to critique the West for their historical wrong doings of the past. While paying little attention to other wrong doings of the world.

Really? So how about you enlighten the entire thread then?

>I would say History is one of the least corrupted humanities department out there.

Also, Classics. Classics professors are the only academics I've ever met who either are centre-right or outright conservatives politically.

well of course academy will give one access to good resources but all its setting prevents its free use, and this cant be seen from the inside. all the organization of an institution is what you primary learn when you are in it, the rest you have to do on your own. and if you have been there enough time you will have assimilated its possibilities as the only ones and wont do anything with whatever resources you have.

i agree that random material from some library is not enough, but what makes you able to use it is putting your mind in a setting where some space can be had for it to put together things in a meaningful way and that is impossible in academia and all its rituals.

and yeah i dropped but only from classes, i kept using the library and other courses in a free way and this opened my experience as nothing before, and now i can freely read on my own and let my mind digest the content to give me real knowledge that i can live, not just use as some ritual item to climb some institution.

This

Bump

...