its ironic the more you disavow modern philosophy the more you adhere to and need actual philosophy. you won't be able to defend 'common sense' against your own flaw of habits let alone everyone else'
it took until the greeks to conceptualize and make explicit things like logic. a caveman used it hand in hand with waving a fish bone in his mangled limbs and hope he doesnt die, all based on his heuristics.
it's academic until you realize that and values or morals has to rest on some metaphysical foundation and then when you have to make an ethical decision it becomes helpful to know what the various arguments are. Or you could just fall for far, far stupider and completely nonsensical memes like "it's a biological imperative to reproduce, therefore that is what I should do", like you do
>Values and morals rest on the results of natural selection
This is truly moronic lmao. I read things and hear arguments and have different experiences, and as a result I change my values.
I don't know what you're getting at. Human beings are here because of earth forming at some point and so Values and morals also rest on geological processes. But that's not useful at all to any decision you could possibly have to make
this is where the 80iq 180iq meme comes from
your actually wrong its just as usefull to be gigasmart as it is to be completly ignorant when makeing a moral decision
midwits crumble to indecision or quite simpily borrow other peoples justifications
or morals has to rest on some metaphysical foundation >Don't hurt other people >Hurting other people is usually the same thing that hurts you, but if they say you're hurting them, you probably are because people are all a bit different
Solved 2000 years ago in the West, 2500 in India. Autists confuse themselves ever since, some become professionals at it.
He didn't solve shit. I read an intro to his works, and even the intro to his works surmises by the end that most of what he had to say was made redundant by the cognitive revolution. The Tractatus was a waste of his time (he said so himself), and his best ideas were developed upon to a greater extent within other fields like linguistics and computing.
>Philosophy made a total waste of time by science
No way.
Postmodernism. Instead of finding answers to questions, question why we question and then question that question and then question that question and then question that question and then-
Philosophy hasn't recovered, it's stuck in a loop and requires a reboot, but it undermines any effort to reboot it.
>Philosophy hasn't recovered, it's stuck in a loop
Good, leave it there.
From someone who knows little, his first book he tries to mathematically prove that every problem that can be solved can be solved with clear language. Most philosophy circles around their questions with sophistry. If it can be said at all it can be said clearly. If you can't strike at the heart then it's nonsense and should be thrown out.
Basically most philosophy is nonsense that just plays with language, or in his own words "whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent."
You can just glance at the book to understand what it's like.
https://www.gutenberg.org/files/5740/5740-pdf.pdf
To any layperson it's a bunch of schizo rambling. But there was an influential group of people the Vienna school that wanted to destroy philosophy and make it subservient to the natural sciences, and used the book as their bible. "Yeah philosophy is a bunch of non empirical rambling"
The interesting point is that Wittgenstein didn't like them at all and attended one of their meetings, he sat grumpy in the corner. People speculate about his intention actually being religious in nature. It's not just "if you can't speak clearly don't say it" it's also "the things you can't speak clearly about, like the meaning of life and God, are the most important things of all". Just the image of these smug sciences homosexuals declaring philosophy dead with this guy's book that he wrote in while in the midst of some of the worst fighting of WW1, looking desperately for a meaning to life, also reading the gospels everyday, is a very captivating image.
The second book he writes refutes what he originally thought of as language, but at that point it gets to autistic for me to even follow in a basic way.
[...]
I found this one alright
>most philosophy is nonsense that just plays with language
I know little of him and Russell philosophically, except that I love Russell's writing (read most of his A History of Western Philosophy, which was better written than any general history book I've ever read), and in large part because it's the only stuff that looks like it was written purposefully to be understood.
for me, its ug krishnamoorty
>Krishnamurti >Rando Indian kid >Western cult sets up shop in his neighborhood, as was normal at the time >Schizo Westerner instantly decides kid is to be the greatest global guru "I seent it in his aura!" >Grooms kid for years to be head of their cult >Kid realizes it and tells them all to frick off permanently >Kid spends rest of life dismissing cults and being rationalist pro-independent thinker >Ends up becoming the greatest global guru of all time
I still don't know what to think of this, but his self-help books are unironically better and more useful than 95% of Western philosophy and more accessible than 100%.
That's deductive reasoning, and it does suck when it's deployed in the fashion you've suggested.
It's not the only option for doing philosophy, though.
Inductive reasoning is key, but science kind of made off with it when so-called natural-philosophy was split into two branches, science and metaphysics.
morals are DNA coded. its not something that arose from contemplation. animals have morals too. you can subvert morals, but you don't need them to be taught to you.
>you can't understand a lion because... you just can't! >a lion's life is just too incomprehensible, hunting, eating, lying on the ground, having sex
and here I thought Rousseau was a shite phisolopher
>[r(x,y)= x likes y >m=me >h=hotdog]
f(m,h), there is nothing you can't say in this language that you can't say in logical mathematical simbols, the only difference is that other languages have ambiguity and other flaws that logic doesn't have
>argue and ramble about shit no one cares about
not to mention the publish-or-perish lifestyle is a ridiculous waste of time. And that's not to mention the academic politics involved.
why philosophy went from creating soviet russia, nazi germany, fascist italy, whatever the frick else in the west to what we have today?
it didn't go anywhere. but philosophers hope this time around nothing bad will happen, surely.
Postmodernism. Instead of finding answers to questions, question why we question and then question that question and then question that question and then question that question and then-
Philosophy hasn't recovered, it's stuck in a loop and requires a reboot, but it undermines any effort to reboot it.
Postmodernism is philosophy at its very worst. Just intellectual onanism dreamt up by privileged twats who have never known any struggle at all in their lives. People like Jason Stanley are a bane on philosophy and the world at large.
The best philosophers, contrary to what we're told, are working class people who actually have enough experience to ground their philosophy in the real world.
>implying Nietzsche wasn't just a proto-postmodernist
you can trace back every single thing that went wrong with philosophy to him.
2 years ago
Anonymous
>Nietzsche >postmodernist
Frick off moron, he loathed charlatans like your ilk and didn't believe truth was subjective
2 years ago
Anonymous
my dude Nietzsche was unironically ahead of the curve, why do you think Derrida & Foucault were all over his works?
the shit the French have been saying in the 60's Nietzsche had already said decades ago, read his essays.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Based excerpts poster, finally someone citing his fricking sources.
This is the only proper way to have these threads so you know you're talking to someone who has read what they're discussing and aren't just winging it.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Nietzsche did not write in English.
2 years ago
Anonymous
obviously not, we all know he wrote in Hebrew but the nazis translated his works to pass it off as German and then burned the original ones.
>philosophy went from creating soviet russia, nazi germany, fascist italy
Oof sounds dangerous. Lets fund the worst parts of it to disarm it. >7 decades later
It was disarmed in a way, considering almost every postmodernist thinker took an anti-revolutionary stance and gave up on Marxism.
There's actually a funny conspiracy among schizo lefties who unironically think postmodernism was funded by the CIA to dismantle the left from within
>a funny conspiracy among schizo lefties who unironically think postmodernism was funded by the CIA to dismantle the left from within
Ridiculous. What could they possibly gain from preventing ideologies dangerous to themselves from gaining influence.
>The left gets completely dismantled and undermined >Incorporated into neoliberalism eventually as "progressives", spending decades in the wilderness despite nearly sparking a revolution in the 60s >The CIA admits to being involved in much of it
Schizo schizo take your meds
Your government would *never* subvert a movement that sought to overthrow it. Governments don't do that. Time magazine said so.
>writes a book about his philosophy >"[you can't understand it by reading the book]"
can't understand it at all then. guy was a moron, a hegel for the moderns
>all philosophical problems disappear when you assert Logical Atomism >whoops, everything is actually language games that map context
He solved it twice.
Evil for taking taking what they were given from Kant? (and Kant from his predecessors? All the way from Plato and the Pre-Socratics?)
If every man is influenced by philosophy maybe we shouldn't treat it like free public services. Figure it out yourself should be a standard.
Analytical philosophy is just mathematics for people who are too stupid to get into proper mathematics. If you're a philosopher you better invent something whacky but interesting to read like nietzche
I hang out with a normie in his 40's who insists that the problems of government and society would be solved if we developed prescriptions based off of brute scientific fact. He cannot comprehend is/ought whatsoever, and he's not the only one I've seen get hung up on this shit. Even people like Sam Harris have trouble with it for some reason.
Based. Hume is one of the philosophers you simply cannot refute.
Academic philosophy is a meme, learn a practical skill and accept that you're gonna die someday, regardless of whether or not there is a God or Being Itself.
He didn't solve shit. I read an intro to his works, and even the intro to his works surmises by the end that most of what he had to say was made redundant by the cognitive revolution. The Tractatus was a waste of his time (he said so himself), and his best ideas were developed upon to a greater extent within other fields like linguistics and computing.
Get out of here with your rinkydink philosopher. Look at him. He hasn't lifted a day in his life. Literally one session and he'd sweat out all those homosexual questions.
Philosophy is dead - he was right in the sense that there are no philosophical problems (anymore). The history of philosophy is one of a philosopher laying the groudwork by finding out what questions need to be asked then the subject is turned into a science and a new field is developed with the scientific method taking over.
i.e. natural philosophy - > physics, biology, chemistry, consciousness, religion and ethics -> neuroscience and psychology, reason, language and thought -> mathmatical logic, computation and linguistics.
There are very few areas left for philosophy, with the philosophy of mind and consciousness the most active and that will soon be finished with a better scientific understanding of the brain and neuroscience.
more is learned about consciousness through 1 mri scan than reading an entire book by dennett, searle or chalmers. They do nothing but muddy the waters as wittgenstein states.
I don't understand him but you're right his life is pretty fricking wild. >same Austrian elementary school as Adolf >sibling all kill themselves >autstic as frick and throws all his money at depressed painters that kill themselves >live in a shack in Norway trying to solve philosophy >WW1 begins and immediately leave the shack to enlist >write your psycho book in the trenches of the eastern front >pass the finished book off to a friend through the bars of a PoW camp >don't give a shit about it as it build crazy momentum in philosophy and live as a school teacher smacking kids who can't do math in some remote european village >spend a decade building a house for your sister in ridiculously autistic detail >voluteer for a hospital in ww2 but refuse to hand out certain meds
etc. etc.
So what was his philosophy about? All I get from Wikipedia is he thought he'd solved some great semantic problem but later changed his mind because words are just what people think they mean, but he also thought noone understood what he was really on about?
From someone who knows little, his first book he tries to mathematically prove that every problem that can be solved can be solved with clear language. Most philosophy circles around their questions with sophistry. If it can be said at all it can be said clearly. If you can't strike at the heart then it's nonsense and should be thrown out.
Basically most philosophy is nonsense that just plays with language, or in his own words "whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent."
You can just glance at the book to understand what it's like.
https://www.gutenberg.org/files/5740/5740-pdf.pdf
To any layperson it's a bunch of schizo rambling. But there was an influential group of people the Vienna school that wanted to destroy philosophy and make it subservient to the natural sciences, and used the book as their bible. "Yeah philosophy is a bunch of non empirical rambling"
The interesting point is that Wittgenstein didn't like them at all and attended one of their meetings, he sat grumpy in the corner. People speculate about his intention actually being religious in nature. It's not just "if you can't speak clearly don't say it" it's also "the things you can't speak clearly about, like the meaning of life and God, are the most important things of all". Just the image of these smug sciences homosexuals declaring philosophy dead with this guy's book that he wrote in while in the midst of some of the worst fighting of WW1, looking desperately for a meaning to life, also reading the gospels everyday, is a very captivating image.
The second book he writes refutes what he originally thought of as language, but at that point it gets to autistic for me to even follow in a basic way.
>disavowed his own early work that 'solved philosophy'
truly philosophical in making one think
I think he was just fricking with Russell
is there a bigger meme than philosophy? you just say "yo this is what's up" and reexplain rudimentary things in your own words like it's kindergarten
Please stick to movies tard, you're out of your depth
oh no, called tard by a pseud
its ironic the more you disavow modern philosophy the more you adhere to and need actual philosophy. you won't be able to defend 'common sense' against your own flaw of habits let alone everyone else'
it took until the greeks to conceptualize and make explicit things like logic. a caveman used it hand in hand with waving a fish bone in his mangled limbs and hope he doesnt die, all based on his heuristics.
it's academic until you realize that and values or morals has to rest on some metaphysical foundation and then when you have to make an ethical decision it becomes helpful to know what the various arguments are. Or you could just fall for far, far stupider and completely nonsensical memes like "it's a biological imperative to reproduce, therefore that is what I should do", like you do
Values and morals rest on the results of natural selection. Then you go full-antirealist. Then you realize arbitrary dogmas are the true answer.
>Values and morals rest on the results of natural selection
This is truly moronic lmao. I read things and hear arguments and have different experiences, and as a result I change my values.
Where do you think your thoughts come from?
I don't know what you're getting at. Human beings are here because of earth forming at some point and so Values and morals also rest on geological processes. But that's not useful at all to any decision you could possibly have to make
this is where the 80iq 180iq meme comes from
your actually wrong its just as usefull to be gigasmart as it is to be completly ignorant when makeing a moral decision
midwits crumble to indecision or quite simpily borrow other peoples justifications
>values or morals has to rest on some metaphysical foundation
No.
t. Post-structuralist.
or morals has to rest on some metaphysical foundation
>Don't hurt other people
>Hurting other people is usually the same thing that hurts you, but if they say you're hurting them, you probably are because people are all a bit different
Solved 2000 years ago in the West, 2500 in India. Autists confuse themselves ever since, some become professionals at it.
>Philosophy made a total waste of time by science
No way.
>Philosophy hasn't recovered, it's stuck in a loop
Good, leave it there.
>most philosophy is nonsense that just plays with language
I know little of him and Russell philosophically, except that I love Russell's writing (read most of his A History of Western Philosophy, which was better written than any general history book I've ever read), and in large part because it's the only stuff that looks like it was written purposefully to be understood.
>Krishnamurti
>Rando Indian kid
>Western cult sets up shop in his neighborhood, as was normal at the time
>Schizo Westerner instantly decides kid is to be the greatest global guru "I seent it in his aura!"
>Grooms kid for years to be head of their cult
>Kid realizes it and tells them all to frick off permanently
>Kid spends rest of life dismissing cults and being rationalist pro-independent thinker
>Ends up becoming the greatest global guru of all time
I still don't know what to think of this, but his self-help books are unironically better and more useful than 95% of Western philosophy and more accessible than 100%.
Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent
Dis lil' homie speaking latin now
That's deductive reasoning, and it does suck when it's deployed in the fashion you've suggested.
It's not the only option for doing philosophy, though.
Inductive reasoning is key, but science kind of made off with it when so-called natural-philosophy was split into two branches, science and metaphysics.
Ironically that was kind of ludwig's point
My second favorite anti-philosophy philosopher after ayn rand
for me, its ug krishnamoorty
Instead, let's take everything for granted, like the fact that you are a Black person.
My problem with modern philosophy is that there is very little rigor in it, it's all "dude trust me". There are very rarely axioms used.
>modern philosphy sucks because instead of "dude trust me" it is "dude, assume you trust me"
bravo
Modern philosophy is a joke, but philosophy was necessary and is necessary today.
Without philosophy morals or science wouldn't exist.
>Without philosophy morals or science wouldn't exist.
morals are DNA coded. its not something that arose from contemplation. animals have morals too. you can subvert morals, but you don't need them to be taught to you.
Nah he's got a movie and it's very good and gay
Why don't people just frickin use google before making these moronic threads?
OP is probably underage zoomer who just discovered Ludwig through some meme youtube video
>you can't understand a lion because... you just can't!
>a lion's life is just too incomprehensible, hunting, eating, lying on the ground, having sex
and here I thought Rousseau was a shite phisolopher
No he didn't
>You """like""" """"hotdogs""""?
>Talk to me in math expressions because I LITERALLY CAN'T UNDERSTAND YOU!!!
>[r(x,y)= x likes y
>m=me
>h=hotdog]
f(m,h), there is nothing you can't say in this language that you can't say in logical mathematical simbols, the only difference is that other languages have ambiguity and other flaws that logic doesn't have
moron
x+1(1x) =1x+1
hed get that ur joke is not funny kek
yeah, no context and nouances are lost when you express yourself in logics, right?
Jarman's take on this based man is pure fricking kino, brother.
tl;dr of this bozos general ideas
>the meaning of words aren't individual / subjective / private at all
no joke, this is what philosophers do, argue and ramble about shit no one cares about
>argue and ramble about shit no one cares about
not to mention the publish-or-perish lifestyle is a ridiculous waste of time. And that's not to mention the academic politics involved.
i know a guy who spends all his time on the internet arguing that atheism is not believing in the absence of god.
it isn't
my cat is an atheist
Your cat is a cat.
>atheism is not believing in the absence of god.
Correct, it's Christcucks strawmanning it that way so they can say: See, atheists believe too!
My chair is an atheist then
athiests do belive put for any argument you want its a belif try do it in 50words or less to save us all some time
my retort is thats a belif
checkmate fedora
>do belive put for
Tips stethoscope
kek i am correct though sadly
why philosophy went from creating soviet russia, nazi germany, fascist italy, whatever the frick else in the west to what we have today?
it didn't go anywhere. but philosophers hope this time around nothing bad will happen, surely.
We should just kill all those c**ts and go back to monarchy
Postmodernism. Instead of finding answers to questions, question why we question and then question that question and then question that question and then question that question and then-
Philosophy hasn't recovered, it's stuck in a loop and requires a reboot, but it undermines any effort to reboot it.
find me the answer to the question
But anon that is hard and requires work, lets instead discuss why we need answers to questions.
i think probably any answer to that kind of question naturaly has to supersceed questioning itself
maybe the act of questioning is the answer to the question why we question
because x ? kek
philosiphy truly is lost in infinity
Postmodernism is philosophy at its very worst. Just intellectual onanism dreamt up by privileged twats who have never known any struggle at all in their lives. People like Jason Stanley are a bane on philosophy and the world at large.
The best philosophers, contrary to what we're told, are working class people who actually have enough experience to ground their philosophy in the real world.
How does being a wage slave allow you to have some special access to the real world?
Read Nietzsche, slave morality etc.
>implying Nietzsche wasn't just a proto-postmodernist
you can trace back every single thing that went wrong with philosophy to him.
>Nietzsche
>postmodernist
Frick off moron, he loathed charlatans like your ilk and didn't believe truth was subjective
my dude Nietzsche was unironically ahead of the curve, why do you think Derrida & Foucault were all over his works?
the shit the French have been saying in the 60's Nietzsche had already said decades ago, read his essays.
Based excerpts poster, finally someone citing his fricking sources.
This is the only proper way to have these threads so you know you're talking to someone who has read what they're discussing and aren't just winging it.
Nietzsche did not write in English.
obviously not, we all know he wrote in Hebrew but the nazis translated his works to pass it off as German and then burned the original ones.
Foucault is another perfect example of intellectual wankery. Helped develop and push an entire school of thought, just to excuse his noncery
We're on Cinemaphile so let me put it this way - Compare how disconnected the modern Hollywood writer's cult is from reality.
Movies have always been full of anti-science bullshit.
It's just their way of coping.
>dude, you eat shit at the bottom of the social hierarchy
>b-but I do know what life is like!
>philosophy went from creating soviet russia, nazi germany, fascist italy
Oof sounds dangerous. Lets fund the worst parts of it to disarm it.
>7 decades later
It was disarmed in a way, considering almost every postmodernist thinker took an anti-revolutionary stance and gave up on Marxism.
There's actually a funny conspiracy among schizo lefties who unironically think postmodernism was funded by the CIA to dismantle the left from within
>a funny conspiracy among schizo lefties who unironically think postmodernism was funded by the CIA to dismantle the left from within
Ridiculous. What could they possibly gain from preventing ideologies dangerous to themselves from gaining influence.
The CIA openly admits to doing this.
>The left gets completely dismantled and undermined
>Incorporated into neoliberalism eventually as "progressives", spending decades in the wilderness despite nearly sparking a revolution in the 60s
>The CIA admits to being involved in much of it
Schizo schizo take your meds
Your government would *never* subvert a movement that sought to overthrow it. Governments don't do that. Time magazine said so.
>d..d..don't think about the big questions, just live and consume then die
Subjective doesn't mean individual/private
>writes a book about his philosophy
>"[you can't understand it by reading the book]"
can't understand it at all then. guy was a moron, a hegel for the moderns
Derek Jarman literally made one 30 odd years ago moron
Uhmm how did he solve philosophy?
>all philosophical problems disappear when you assert Logical Atomism
>whoops, everything is actually language games that map context
He solved it twice.
Eat shit homosexual.
He roasted Hitler too hard when they were at primary school
Him, Heidegger and Hegel are the most evil men in history.
Evil for taking taking what they were given from Kant? (and Kant from his predecessors? All the way from Plato and the Pre-Socratics?)
If every man is influenced by philosophy maybe we shouldn't treat it like free public services. Figure it out yourself should be a standard.
Not from taking it but from using it stupidly
Analytical philosophy is just mathematics for people who are too stupid to get into proper mathematics. If you're a philosopher you better invent something whacky but interesting to read like nietzche
jesus solved philosophy, last 2000 years have been just a cope
solved philosophy.
That isn't Hume.
I hang out with a normie in his 40's who insists that the problems of government and society would be solved if we developed prescriptions based off of brute scientific fact. He cannot comprehend is/ought whatsoever, and he's not the only one I've seen get hung up on this shit. Even people like Sam Harris have trouble with it for some reason.
my best friend is like this but he's an autistic mechanical engineer
its better than being an autist and knowing about is/ought, so becoming a serial killer
I kill probably millions of living beings every day.
>s-source?
>I felt it
Where do I start with Hume? He interests me.
Start with the Greeks.
Based. Hume is one of the philosophers you simply cannot refute.
Academic philosophy is a meme, learn a practical skill and accept that you're gonna die someday, regardless of whether or not there is a God or Being Itself.
>t. philosophy major
Bentham was a better looking chubbo
He didn't solve shit. I read an intro to his works, and even the intro to his works surmises by the end that most of what he had to say was made redundant by the cognitive revolution. The Tractatus was a waste of his time (he said so himself), and his best ideas were developed upon to a greater extent within other fields like linguistics and computing.
>solve philosophy
You mean he figured out how to wipe his ass?
i bet you have blue hair and weigh 280
>it's just words bro
Get out of here with your rinkydink philosopher. Look at him. He hasn't lifted a day in his life. Literally one session and he'd sweat out all those homosexual questions.
Philosophy is dead - he was right in the sense that there are no philosophical problems (anymore). The history of philosophy is one of a philosopher laying the groudwork by finding out what questions need to be asked then the subject is turned into a science and a new field is developed with the scientific method taking over.
i.e. natural philosophy - > physics, biology, chemistry, consciousness, religion and ethics -> neuroscience and psychology, reason, language and thought -> mathmatical logic, computation and linguistics.
There are very few areas left for philosophy, with the philosophy of mind and consciousness the most active and that will soon be finished with a better scientific understanding of the brain and neuroscience.
>that will soon be finished
There's absolutely no sign of that all.
more is learned about consciousness through 1 mri scan than reading an entire book by dennett, searle or chalmers. They do nothing but muddy the waters as wittgenstein states.
>more is learned about consciousness through 1 mri scan
obviously not
moron
t. philosophy graduate trying to justify wasting 4 years of his life
I don't understand him but you're right his life is pretty fricking wild.
>same Austrian elementary school as Adolf
>sibling all kill themselves
>autstic as frick and throws all his money at depressed painters that kill themselves
>live in a shack in Norway trying to solve philosophy
>WW1 begins and immediately leave the shack to enlist
>write your psycho book in the trenches of the eastern front
>pass the finished book off to a friend through the bars of a PoW camp
>don't give a shit about it as it build crazy momentum in philosophy and live as a school teacher smacking kids who can't do math in some remote european village
>spend a decade building a house for your sister in ridiculously autistic detail
>voluteer for a hospital in ww2 but refuse to hand out certain meds
etc. etc.
so theres no biopic that goes through all this
Did he demand that he is Vroomfondel?
There is literally zero use of philosophy, it just defines behaviours in weird terms just for flex
I'll always be amazed at the fact Hitler and Wittgenstein were classmates.
Why did he scribble on the wall?
So what was his philosophy about? All I get from Wikipedia is he thought he'd solved some great semantic problem but later changed his mind because words are just what people think they mean, but he also thought noone understood what he was really on about?
From someone who knows little, his first book he tries to mathematically prove that every problem that can be solved can be solved with clear language. Most philosophy circles around their questions with sophistry. If it can be said at all it can be said clearly. If you can't strike at the heart then it's nonsense and should be thrown out.
Basically most philosophy is nonsense that just plays with language, or in his own words "whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent."
You can just glance at the book to understand what it's like.
https://www.gutenberg.org/files/5740/5740-pdf.pdf
To any layperson it's a bunch of schizo rambling. But there was an influential group of people the Vienna school that wanted to destroy philosophy and make it subservient to the natural sciences, and used the book as their bible. "Yeah philosophy is a bunch of non empirical rambling"
The interesting point is that Wittgenstein didn't like them at all and attended one of their meetings, he sat grumpy in the corner. People speculate about his intention actually being religious in nature. It's not just "if you can't speak clearly don't say it" it's also "the things you can't speak clearly about, like the meaning of life and God, are the most important things of all". Just the image of these smug sciences homosexuals declaring philosophy dead with this guy's book that he wrote in while in the midst of some of the worst fighting of WW1, looking desperately for a meaning to life, also reading the gospels everyday, is a very captivating image.
The second book he writes refutes what he originally thought of as language, but at that point it gets to autistic for me to even follow in a basic way.
I found this one alright
good summary
hegel, actually
it would be kino
Holy based
This is how autists flirt. He def wanted to frick dude's wife.
>there's that great philosopher I was telling you about
>Jeepers fellas its the cops!
>Do you think Russell has ever sat in a bull-doh-zer before?
Did Wittgenstein ever get any quality pussy?
he was gay
Gay pedophile and a groomer.
source?
Huh? That isn't an image of Ayn Rand..
He has one moron
>filters the nihilistic, STEMcel, wagie
another day another case of general heaving better thread about un a topic unrelated to the general than designated general
Based OP. Best thread in ages.
>wittgen~~*stein*~~
Thank God we have better modern-day philosophers like Contrapoints. Pseudgenstein was a gay hack.