Ill just leave this here

This really is a pointless dispute. It reminds me of when kids would argue which consol was better. Do we all really just need to feel like we belong to a group at any cost?

>the analytics use logic
And where are their answers?

Tribalism my user, it's the way of the mediocre mind

Tribalism is a part of the human condition you jackass. Youre tribe is youre tribe is mindless centrism

>not being a leftist via analytic interpretations of Hegel by Sellars and Brandom

>replying to some vague expression, "where's the proof"
>response is equally vague and only closes off

Why respond to such grand sweeping vague bait?

This isn't a pointless dispute and is not merely tribalism.

It takes time to study, and you can't study everything. Deciding what to study means you have to say no to some things, and that is where this dispute gains value.

>yfw this is peterson v harris

Yes? What's your point?

Good analytical philosophy actually has standards set up since fucking Aristotle that follows a format that allows for easy and proper debate and concise criticism based on logic and evidence.

Continental philosophers are too pussy to accept the fact they might get disproven so they hide all their basic prepositions in a smokescreen of words and rhetoric.

Only brainlets hate analytical philosophy.

>standards set up since fucking Aristotle
>the man who justified his views with "cause teleology!"
>any sort of standards

>"Continental philosophers are too pussy to accept the fact they might get disproven"
>autistically screeching the names of random argument fallacies you heard from your favorite youtuber
>implying this proves anyone wrong

>every analytic philosopher ever
youtu.be/Lz78dn2Zegw

STRAW MAN FALLACY!
AD HOMINEM FALLACY!

REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

Continental philosophy is for pseudo-intellectual teenagers. Analytic philosophy is for actual mathematicians and/or logicians.

thank you OP, I just woke up and this day is full of hope

Analytic philosphy is for people who aren't smart enough to actually go into the sciences

>cultural marx

shit son

Oh gosh this picture.

>Continental philosophers are too pussy to accept the fact they might get disproven so they hide all their basic prepositions in a smokescreen of words and rhetoric.

All "basic prepositions" are smokescreens you fucking moron.

t. Nietzsche

>Analytic philosophy is for actual mathematicians
Kekked.
t. actual mathematician

top kek

>Gene Pool Saht

5 star post

>logic and evidence
Don't exist.
>proof
Doesn't exist
>prepositions
There is no way to quantify the 'goodness' of one over another.

Why is fallibility good?
Why is proof good?
Why is logic good?

And you people want to argue analytic phil is useless and autistic?

>useless
'use' is not defined.

You forgot Eastern philosophy you nigger.

its when you think about croissants and stuff

full english philosophy is better

ultimately this sophistry lead nowhere. it is pedantry for the literal sake of being a pedant, misconstrued as logical rigor. arguing over semantics is for the frail having no foundation to stand upon. fuck you

>foundation
No such thing exists.

My will.

Your will isn't a foundation.

...

no no no, the proper response is: 'will' is not defined.

It actually is, though. 'use' is not, it requires an object, and a source.

What wills? the self. What uses? can't say.
What is willed? everything. what is being used? can't say.

what is "the self"?

Bump

what part of the post did your analytical brain blow a fuse on?

>smokescreen of words and rhetoric.
If I say jouissance are you triggered?

The analytic philosopher accuses the continental philosopher of not being sufficiently clear, the continental philosopher in turn tells the analytic philosopher he's not being sufficient

haha

Literally everything.

>tfw she's a foundationalist

>if it can't be proven to be true it isn't true
wait not even that
>if it can't be proven to be true i don't think it's true
this is the killer problem with analytic "philosophy"

Yeah it's not like "how to use logic" is a heavily debated subject or anything.

Continental philosophy is for failed artists.

Analytic philosophy is for failed scientists,

Oh shit it's unfalsifiable! Truly, that is a fatal flaw.

None of the western canon actually bothered with eastern philosophy except Schopenhauer who merely regarded some of it's aspects as an ontological escapade.

How would you falsify the idea that falsifiability is important?

By asking 'How do you falsify', you've already assumed the concept to be valid. You've answered your own question

No.

>analytics think clarity is relevant
No one is biting that.
Because the canon is awful.

Yes, you did. You even used the same word for it. Why would you ask a question, using a concept and the very word for it, while you don't think said concept is in any way, shape or form valid?

Your proposition quite literally commited suicide

Reminder that this "dispute" literally doesn't exist in academia. No serious philosopher working today thinks in terms of continental versus analytic philosophy.

>Yes, you did.
No.
>Why would you ask a question, using a concept and the very word for it, while you don't think said concept is in any way, shape or form valid?
Stop being eristic. Also start using your imagination.
>Your proposition quite literally commited suicide
No.

t. redditor at anal autistic department

>Stop being eristic. Also start using your imagination.

Those aren't arguments

>Arguments are good because reddit said so

>those urgings aren't arguments
Good for you, being able to read. Do you want a cookie or something?

Not an argument

Argue why arguments are good without being circular or making a presupposition.

Oh wait that's impossible.

Not an argument

>Argue why arguments are good without being circular or making a presupposition.

If you first argue why they don't

Why would I do that?

Continental philosophy IS an art.

That's ultimately the main point of contention for (most) analautists.

Are you alright, user?

>bongo bongo land
>philosophy
pick exactly one

good memes here

>continental
Roleplaying community that likes muh feelings.

You understand nothing about philosophy and it's pointless to explain why because you never will.

why wouldn't feelings be the only thing that matters?

So philosophy is for failures.

You write how autistic people speak.

Serious question guys. When and where exactly was analytic philosophy born ?

kekekekekekekekekekekekek judging by his voice i thought he was going to be an autist sperg but this much post-irony. damn.

bump

>rebel absurdity

frege

>frankfurt school of witchcraft and wizardry

A reality in which an unfalsifiable proposition is false does not differ from a reality in which the same proposition is true. Since the truth value of an unfalsifiable proposition is independent from our reality, a philosophy that relies on a bunch of unfalsifiable statements does not contribute in any way to our knowledge of the real world.
But all of this is pretty obvious and you know it already.

because i FEEL THAT LOGIC IS BETTER WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH
i cant use my autism to prove something so its bad WAAAAH EVERYTHING NEEDS TO BE PRAGMATIC FOR ARBITRARY REASONS

...

I'll just leave this here