Please help Veeky Forums. I think my sister has gotten interested in analytic philosophy...

Please help Veeky Forums. I think my sister has gotten interested in analytic philosophy. How do stop her from going down the wrong path?

Other urls found in this thread:

www2.ubishops.ca/baudrillardstudies/vol-6_1/v6-1-Singer-cavalieri.html
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

Tell her that analytic philosophers are merely LARP'ing as mathematicians/physicists, because they are too stupid for the latter two subjects.

Get her to start with Frege and then be really sneaky and slip some Cohen and Natorp in there. Then tie her up and punch her in the tits over and over again until she understands what intentionality means and starts saying "always already" when describing epistemological stances or semantic content. When you think she's ready, show her some Quine. If she starts making pained faces and asking for something a little less discursively naive, let her go. If not, you're gonna have to start breaking fingers.

B her TFO with your superior continental strain, obviously.

Make her aware that Wittgenstein addressed analytic concerns without any of the bullshit faux-mathematics.

Isn't the tractatus full of formal logic?

Yes, but it makes sense.

Nothing like OP's pic, which is the mathematical equivalent of Hegelian's elaborate yet specious writing.

But I don't want her to be any kind of analytic.

www2.ubishops.ca/baudrillardstudies/vol-6_1/v6-1-Singer-cavalieri.html

>Since arguments in the Continental tradition are stated differently than in analytic moral philosophy, before replying to Žižek’s criticisms, we shall summarize the main steps in his discussion, in order to be able to develop some preliminary considerations and then to reply to them.

>II. Žižek’s argument

>III. Some Misunderstandings

>IV. Some Non-sequiturs

I don't even have a vagina and I still feel like my genitals are drying.

Let her get somewhat interested in it and then make her read Witty's Philosophical Investigations. Not joking. Later Wittgenstein does a great job undermining the tropes of thinking typical of analytic philosophy, but only once you've internalized those tropes.

agreed for Wittgenstein being the only cool analytical philosopher.

That might work. Thanks! Is ordinary language philosophy that much better though?

Quine is great though

Get her to a doctor so she can be diagnosed somewhere on the spectrum. Hopefully from there she will decide to be an engineer.

>muh math and natural sciences
>doesn't do math and natural science
if you're going to do philosophy do continental. it'll all be outdated in 100 years so at least write something that attempts to stand on its own.

I wouldn't really call later Wittgenstein ordinary language philosophy. He's doing something much more profound and critical-deflationary with respect to analytic philosophy than the likes of Austin or Ryle.

According to my old prof, who talked to von Wright, Wittgenstein "wanted to destroy philosophy. All of it!" Obviously his method involves attending to how the relevant linguistic practices actually proceed in real-life discourse, but only inasmuch as that can help us to avoid the mistakes we made when we started to philosophize on the relevant issues, and not as a philosophical end in itself. If we can see where the decisive move in the conjuring trick is, which we had thought to be innocent, we might be able to avoid it. (But that might mean giving up philosophy altogether, which makes Wittgenstein hard to live up to.)

Tell her that if she wants to learn science and math she should study them instead. That way she would be able to make a lasting improvent in knowledge, instead of doing a lot of neo-scholastic navel gazing.

hook me up f a m

OP's pic makes perfect sense, those are semantic clauses that give truth conditional contributions of sentential operators in a tense logic.

Only because you are too stupid to understand it doesn't make it wrong.

Is a course on analytic philosophy worth taking? It's for my philosophy specialist. I have no background in it but from Veeky Forums I gather it's not liked.

Never listen to Veeky Forums when it comes to philosophy. I'd wager that 90% of the people here who have read philosophy have only bothered with aphorisms of Nietzsche/Schopenhauer/Heraclitus because it requires the least amount of thought possible. Take the course

>a logic
>right/wrong

Let her be, it'll only strengthen her continentalism in the end, once she finally realizes the true way to knowledge.

>the true way to knowledge
do tell

2nded

What's a philosophy specialist?

the same can be said about Derrida, yet, anautistic fags keep saying it's gobbledygook

a lot of colleges now let you take various types of degrees, like a Dual Major, or a Major/Minor, or a Major + Two Minors

a Specialist is like a souped-up Major. a Major usually forces you to take something like 30-50% of your credits in the chosen subject, but you have to take the rest in your minors, and in general education credits (like mandatory science courses for humanities majors or vice versa, so you'll be well-rounded). a Specialist allows/requires you do even more (say, 60%) in your chosen field.

Then it's scary that someone doing that would ask Veeky Forums analytic philosophy is worthwhile.

*ask Veeky Forums if

You let her figure it out herself. All in all that will be a much more enriching experience. But if you wanted, you could talk to her and apply your oh so great understanding, since you clearly don't need us to tell you how to rationalize your beliefs.

It's not about belief it's about not letting her waste her life.

If you're so confident it's a waste of her life you should be capable of explaining to her why you think this. Pay attention.

It's hard to explain things that are self evident.

Good job dipshit.

Thanks.