Rebels Against Philosophy

This is the place to shave off that long white beard and stop being philosophical; a forum for members to just talk like normal human beings.

Moderator: MagsJ

Rebels Against Philosophy

Postby Guide » Mon Aug 27, 2018 2:01 am

Rebels of the utterly strange, of philosophy itself, they who want to bring philosophy to ruin. Though, to be sure, philosophy, in its essence, has become something as ungraspable as the raising of the human eyes in the First Beginning. Ergo, Nietzsche and the Thinkers clash, whereas, for the publicness of the internet, all is "philosophy", even "logic", which is maths (in the modern sense of Frege and Russel, not the sense of Plato, e.g., mathamatikos, basic reliableness of what is knowable, and not only arithmetic and geometry) and almost the furthest thing from logos. Philosophy, and that never means British talk about acts of language, or British tinkering, even less, American barking about Science, the authority of Searle and the like. Those who never had an inkling of the being of philosophy.
Guide
 
Posts: 198
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2018 2:20 am

Re: Rebels Against Philosophy

Postby Fixed Cross » Mon Aug 27, 2018 2:41 pm

Guide wrote: and almost the furthest thing from logos.

Cool, some legitimate observations.

How is your understanding of Heidegger?
The only philosopher of the 20th century.
The strong do what they can, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
Image
Before the Light - Tree of Life Academy - Thought of a Rune (film by Pezer)
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 7887
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships

Re: Rebels Against Philosophy

Postby Guide » Mon Aug 27, 2018 10:21 pm

Well, the group must say, Husserl too lived in the last century, and Strauss says Whitehead and Bergson were great philosophers. It is also the case, so the group observes, there were several great theologians who bled for time's sake. Many of this group member's investigations have held their breath thinking in the paragraphs of the work with the name Heidegger. However, Georg Simmel was also a great thinker of the last century, though he died early in it. There are others left out. Max Scheler for instance. That being said, in a certain sense, "only" is also correctly said in this case, for the superior path-making power concerning the subject mater of the weird enslaving power of time.
Guide
 
Posts: 198
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2018 2:20 am

Re: Rebels Against Philosophy

Postby Fixed Cross » Tue Aug 28, 2018 10:57 am

Nice collection.

To my mind, Degger is the only one of these who sufficiently challenged the minds architecture and thereby furthered the ancient project.

The others aren't without merit, but only H is essential. At least to the path that leads from Thales onward and goes underground at the rise of the sophists.

But feel welcome to convince me of the necessity of your champions.
The strong do what they can, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
Image
Before the Light - Tree of Life Academy - Thought of a Rune (film by Pezer)
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 7887
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships

Re: Rebels Against Philosophy

Postby MagsJ » Tue Aug 28, 2018 1:21 pm

I'm quite liking what Max Weiber had to say and wrote, as opposed to Georg Simmel, and Weiber might gift me with a thought or more.. comparable to Santayana's, in the usefulness stakes, to me.

Why are these lesser-known names lesser known, as opposed to your Nietzsches and Heideggers and such?

You know.. neither posturing nor polemic are in the Oxford English Dictionary of Philosophy. Simply shocking. :-?
The possibility of anything we can imagine existing is endless and infinite

--MagsJ
User avatar
MagsJ
The Londonist
 
Posts: 17628
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 2:59 pm
Location: London, NC1

Re: Rebels Against Philosophy

Postby Fixed Cross » Tue Aug 28, 2018 2:34 pm

Weber indeed does little besides posturing and opining. I've never encountered an attempt at an argument when reading him.

Philosophy is simply very complicated. It deals with what is behind language and has to do this through language. Not a lot of people are relentless enough for this.
The strong do what they can, the weak accept what they must.
- Thucydides
Image
Before the Light - Tree of Life Academy - Thought of a Rune (film by Pezer)
User avatar
Fixed Cross
Doric Usurper
 
Posts: 7887
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:53 am
Location: the black ships

Re: Rebels Against Philosophy

Postby Guide » Tue Aug 28, 2018 5:26 pm

"I'm quite liking what Max Weiber had to say and wrote, as opposed to Georg Simmel, and Weiber might gift me with a thought or more.. comparable to Santayana's, in the usefulness stakes, to me.

Why are these lesser-known names lesser known, as opposed to your Nietzsches and Heideggers and such?

You know.. neither posturing nor polemic are in the Oxford English Dictionary of Philosophy. Simply shocking. "


Weber and Simmel were early interpreters of Nietzsche, and in practical terms their work is much more important, since they determined the methods of the American Universities (i.e., the most powerful universities which most determine the fate of all life on the earth) in toto. The wert-frei or value free methodology of the social sciences (wert = worth, 'worth free'). Simmel derived the fact value distinction as a manner of making the Nietschean teaching palatable and possible in the University as such.

The group would say, Weber is not a philosopher at all, except so far as Sociology is the current form in which Philosophy expresses itself, i.e., in radical decay. Simmel wrote relatively little that is overtly philosophical, but what he did is of the highest level, and has more piercing power than Heidegger in certain respects. Heidegger admired and learned from Simmel, much more from Max Scheler. Husserl and Heidegger are the only true defenders of Western fate as such which gives the phenomenological hermeneutics its pride of place. Otherwise one must give way to the authority of the European Science (which is now planetary , and everywhere understood as universal truth) and, therefore, ideology as what draws on its authority with an ever more radical subjectivity which subordinates and relativises in exact ratio as it comes to supreme and worthless power.

--

Note: the issue of the "fact vale" distinction is a long one, and the Wikipedia article is useless and even misleading in this connection. The group writes this simply in order to show it is not unaware of the "different" accounts of this basic, crucial, matter some will know.
Last edited by Guide on Tue Aug 28, 2018 5:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Guide
 
Posts: 198
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2018 2:20 am

Re: Rebels Against Philosophy

Postby Guide » Tue Aug 28, 2018 5:38 pm

"Weber indeed does little besides posturing and opining. I've never encountered an attempt at an argument when reading him.

Philosophy is simply very complicated. It deals with what is behind language and has to do this through language. Not a lot of people are relentless enough for this."


The group says, this, however, is a somewhat inadequate statement. What must be made pellucid is: what comes to power has little reference to "argument", insofar as one would make some claim to know the rational one moves on a different plain with what comes to power in human life.

The notion of the rational is radically challenged in the Essence of Technology. It is even true that, with respect to a point made by the group elsewhere, that the conversion of the "naive objectivity", of an animal with sense and speech that makes sense, to the "transcendental phantasy", is not susceptible of being effaced. The view that some human thinking is "pre-Kantian" is the product of a mistaken view of what philosophy is, and a fortiori, of what the world is. The transcendental subjectivity permeates the general opinion of human beings, and is visible in everyday common dealings. The lack of explicate understanding of this in almost everyone only means that one often does not know oneself or one's views: that one is blind to the atmosphere of the age in which one lives and which enslaves one not as atmospheric medium, but as what one has as one has life. One does not move in life, but has life. The enslaving power of the age is what one has.
Guide
 
Posts: 198
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2018 2:20 am

Re: Rebels Against Philosophy

Postby MagsJ » Wed Aug 29, 2018 3:40 pm

Fixed Cross wrote:Weber indeed does little besides posturing and opining. I've never encountered an attempt at an argument when reading him.

Philosophy is simply very complicated. It deals with what is behind language and has to do this through language. Not a lot of people are relentless enough for this.

I will read his 'best bits' and see what I come up with, as we all like a different kind of philosophy.. one size, not always fitting all.

I read up on the Teutons, whom you mentioned in another thread.. I now understand why modern Europe is how it is and the German attribute of power-lust.. though Hollywood films on that era were the trend during Hollywood's golden years, and the battle scenes.. spectacular.
The possibility of anything we can imagine existing is endless and infinite

--MagsJ
User avatar
MagsJ
The Londonist
 
Posts: 17628
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 2:59 pm
Location: London, NC1


Return to Non-Philosophical Chat



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users