>>24105785I'm guessing you're 20 years old? If so, enjoy it man.
where do i even start on philosophy? i haven't a clue
>>24105785In 2025 learn to use photoshop and don't compress the image resolution so much the titles are illegible
>>24105810Start at the beginning
>>24105785>Putting Guenon with WittgensteinSkip the analyticals. Go straight to Traditionalism and then go into Orthodox Spirituality. Give a try to Damascene Christensen and Seraphim Rose. That's the good stuff.
>>24105833Wittgenstein is an important pathway out of analytical sophistry
>>24105810Start with the Greeks
>>24105785Mine went a little something like this.
>>24105838It's still on the same framework imo, just one step beyond into the degradation that people like Frege and Carnap symbolize.He puts the focus on language and suggests you should skip entirely everything that cannot be expressed by said language. By doing so, he's not only invalidating proper metaphysics and ethics, but he's also turning philosophy of science into a field which can only study propositions.
>>24105785>obsessing over black swan in 2021 Holy cringerinos
>>24105785Good start but no development after that. You just stayed a midwit pseud. Quite the achievement actually. You sure you actually read Plato and Aristotle in the first place? Nietzsche I can see but damn.
>>24105872It's probably referring to the School of Life videos, not the texts.
>>24105785>Not eventually entering into an eternal hegel phaseIn the trash it goes.
>>24105877Oh, everything makes perfect sense now. My bad.
>>24105850I agree, later Wittgenstein isn't some perfected stopping point, but I found reading through his transition to be a powerful deviating moment away from the purely rational logic trap. I think one should focus more on his concept of the game of language, rather than any scientific linguistics. Escaping one's own mind and arriving once again into a social landscape is the beginning of a mature approach to philosophy.
>>24105833This has to be the worst literature advice ever given.
>>24105785Ironically your arthouse phase was the least pretentious.
>>24105887I’ve recently come to the conclusion that the deeper issue lies in the focus on language itself. Although Wittgenstein cannot (and should not) be blamed for it, his axiom "whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent" represents one of the two possible outcomes of this line of thought. The other outcome, I believe, is personified by Derrida, who chose to focus precisely on what language fails to convey.Both approaches become stopping points for many because they represent the only two possible directions that arise from focusing on language—something that is, after all, mundane and ever-changing. Such a focus was never meant to be the center of philosophy, yet it became inevitable because the shift away from the transcendent and toward the mundane has defined modernity since Descartes, and specially from Kant onwards.>>24105887In all seriousness, I believe that Traditionalism is a far more compelling school of thought than what mainstream academia teaches nowadays. Even if one disagrees with many of its positions (as I do, by the way), it is still is an interesting read. I would entirely skip both the Frankfurt School and the Analyticals; they have contributed to philosophy as much as the sophists did.
>>24105931the second part was meant to >>24105889
>>24105785A lot of those are pretty uplifting...
>>24105785I actually am super into Ta-Nehisi Coates now. I was born white but I wear shoe polish on my face and I simply imagine I am black and whites are keeping me down. Only my subjective experience is real.
>>24105785Are you gaping for Hegel yet?
>>24105785>still stuck inside in 2021I'm sure glad I lived in a red state, no mask mandate by summer '21, everything open that did reopen
>>24105785Plato, Aristotle, Eckhart, Spinoza, Kant, Hegel, Heidegger, Schmitt, Derrida, and then this. Anything outside of this will complicate philosophy in a way that is unnecessary. After you finish with Melville you need to start thinking for yourself.
I'm the Melville poster >>24105843beautiful development>>24105931The critical theorists are very important in the sense that they explain a lot of the problems of industrial culture very well. The Frankfurt School is easy to summarize, but Jameson's essays on post modernism are essential, and Huyssen's After the Great Divide is a really great way to relate philosophy back to traditionalism. In general the path forward is Hegel and its better to forget the noise after him, but the critical theorists benefit from talking about culture first and foremost compared to the delusions and misunderstandings that the Marxists or existentialists had.
>>24106181>In general the path forward is Hegel and its better to forget the noise after himNTA. I've only read as far as the Greeks. The practicality of their work is pretty apparent. Could you give a brief pragmatic overview of the later philosophers?
>>24105785>Aphex TwinAlso, that's not your "philosophical journey". That's your narcissistic journey. You're underage and don't care about literature, only yourself and how others perceive you. Otherwise you wouldn't concoct such a cringe image.
>>24106205The sickness of modernity infects all things
>>24105785Inspect the apples before loading them into the barrel.
>>241057852022jak was your peak because its me.
>>24106170It's also important to avoid Tacitus in your studies. It's poison, moral poison. Akenside's Pleasures of the Imagination on the other hand, now THAT'S a work worth reading.
>>24106181>The critical theorists are very important in the sense that they explain a lot of the problems of industrial culture very wellYes, but they explain it only within a material framework. The true philosophical tradition cannot be understood through the lens of modern or postmodern thought, as these systems are inherently disconnected from the metaphysical truths that traditionalism upholds. Moreover, they do not advocate for the restoration of traditional knowledge and spiritual practices as the necessary antidote to the malaise of modernity, but rather the opposite, focusing on the more transient aspects of philosophy instead.>In general the path forward is Hegel and its better to forget the noise after himHegel is essentially Kant attempting to recover metaphysics, but it was too late, as the framework had already gone astray. The epistemological divide between phenomenon and noumenon caused irreparable damage to Western philosophy, and we have yet to recover from it.
>>24106170>Anything outside of this will complicate philosophy in a way that is unnecessary.You're not doing philosophy if you're not wading through all the overcomplication and trying to grasp at any sort of handhold for answers. Doing what you suggest is just training the anon to think in a prescribed manner.
>>24105810the trial and death of socrates dialogues by plato
>>24105806Enjoy… what? Being broke, retarded, spastically horny, and getting passed over by girls your age for established finance bros in their mid 30s?>mUh best years of my life You’re an turbonormie, dude. Foh with that shit.
>>24105785Anyone who followed lockdown restrictions is a bugman and I lose all respect for them... literally putting yourself under house arrest to appease big pharma billionaires.
>>24108199>site full of hikki-NEETs>retards still complain to this day about lockdowns that never affected them
>>24105785>crisis of the modern world>entry level theosophy, probably the most cookie cutter exploration of eastern spirituality catered where french fry whines about Christianity not being very serious anymore>bottom rowEveryone in this thread is disingenuous NIGGERYOURE ALL FAGGOTS HOLY SHIT
>>24105785>Ito below Lynch>Aurelius on the same plane as Kunt>The Sternman not even on the list
>>24105833One should be well familiar with neoplatonism before going into traditionalism
>>24105785op you are emphatically the blackest double nigger on this website
>>24105785>No Heideggerngmi
>>24107525you sound retarded but thats valid!
Sorry for the delay>>24106205If you are using philosophy just to regulate your emotions and do better at thinking through things rationally you dont need much beyond the stoics and maybe a prop logic course or something. My advice is more if you want to contend with the bigger questions about life and politics which is the problem of metaphysics. >>24106311lmfao>>24107079>are inherently disconnected from the metaphysical truths that traditionalism upholdsyes but its extremely important to contextualize what the material problems of culture are for someone outside of the academy to start making sense of things through philosophical language. I understand what you are saying, but I think the lack of voices outside of Marxism dealing with the metaphysical problems of modernity is the actual problem that we unfortunately don't have a solution for beyond critically reading the critical theorists. >Hegel is essentially Kant attempting to recover metaphysics, but it was too late, as the framework had already gone astray. The epistemological divide between phenomenon and noumenon caused irreparable damage to Western philosophy, and we have yet to recover from it.I disagree, Kant in some respects was just restating the obvious that the enlightenment was trying to run away from, which is the problem of historicity by pretending dialectics is not good philosophy. Kant's phenomenal distinction was necessary as it refocused philosophy, but the answer to this problem predated people like Hegel with the concept of the Godhead (mediation). >>24107280There are generally two ways you can read the history of philosophy. 1. Philosophy is tool humans use to synthesize the problems of consciousness and science because metaphysics do not exist. 2. Philosophy is a historical process of self discovery of the human experience which seeks to reveal as much truth about metaphysics as we have access to. This is extremely simplified, but I feel like its a fair stigmatization of the analytical and continental divide. You get a lot of cope about this divide "not existing" because after positivism and other factions of materialism failed miserably you have a lot of departments trying to synthesize their materialism and appeals to logic with some of the nuances of people like Nietzsche but IMO they are in a perma state of denying late Wittgenstein. I think if you want to seriously study philosophy and try to work through problems yourself you need to go through a generous reading of the history of philosophy that doesnt deny metaphysics before you can start asking if the analytics who denied Husserl's metaphysics were in the right to start positing that the brain is like a computer, that consciousness isn't real, and that metaphysics was an excuse to avoid math. tbf I acknowledge I am biased, but I think its hard to really work through the philosophical problems of language that people like Derrida identified and see people like Dennet hand wave it
Better philosophy than anything else /lit/ has shilled. The main reason being it's not made up, everything here is pretty much true and became true and will continue to come true.
>>24109235low effort bait try again
>>24109237I'm not baiting. This cured my depressive malaise. Reading the typical stuff posted here didn't help w/ that at all. I wouldn't recommend it if there were something that does what it does and better, but I've been unable to find anything of the sort.
>>24105785After Myth of Sisyphus I dropped philosophy pretty hard
>>24109243I don't care how the book made you feel, Yudkowsky is someone who has very little knowledge on anything and is a very big bullshitter, but this is hilariously obvious through his "philosophy". He has a bottom of the barrel understanding of utilitarianism which drives his entire underlying meta ethics which is at the heart of the AI question. Have you never wondered why the rationalists don't engage with academia? Have you never wondered why they don't publish papers or go to conferences where they would actually have to respond to professional criticism? You got conned by an intellectual scam artist who is able to be platformed by the glory of the internet which gives a voice to charlatans who are able to shill their snake oil more efficiently than ever - meanwhile academics have to actually do their job. Philosophy isn't about making yourself feel better, its about trying to get to something that resembles the truth. Unfortunately this is normally going to make you feel worse, check out Cioran if you want some insight into how bleak modern thought can get, but that shouldn't mean you are comfortable being robbed intellectually by con men.
>>24105785Based unfiltered and actual retard
>>24109232>There are generally two ways you can read the history of philosophy. >1. Philosophy is tool humans use to synthesize the problems of consciousness and science because metaphysics do not exist. >2. Philosophy is a historical process of self discovery of the human experience which seeks to reveal as much truth about metaphysics as we have access to. I'm definitely more sympathetic to the 2nd way of viewing things, although I think I'd modify it so it's a bit more broad: Philosophy is the process of making sense of and trying to discover truths about our lived experience, including questions epistemological, metaphyiscal, (meta-)ethical, etc. I think doing it this way allows for the 1st reading to be accomodated, too, in a very loose sense, given that it allows for philosophy to also be a tool for the sciences as the Logical Positivists envisioned it, although you'd absolutely need to get rid of the clause that metaphysical questions are nonsensical. >This is extremely simplified, but I feel like its a fair stigmatization of the analytical and continental divide. You get a lot of cope about this divide "not existing" because after positivism and other factions of materialism failed miserably you have a lot of departments trying to synthesize their materialism and appeals to logic with some of the nuances of people like Nietzsche but IMO they are in a perma state of denying late Wittgenstein. I think if you want to seriously study philosophy and try to work through problems yourself you need to go through a generous reading of the history of philosophy that doesnt deny metaphysics before you can start asking if the analytics who denied Husserl's metaphysics were in the right to start positing that the brain is like a computer, that consciousness isn't real, and that metaphysics was an excuse to avoid math. tbf I acknowledge I am biased, but I think its hard to really work through the philosophical problems of language that people like Derrida identified and see people like Dennet hand wave itI can understand where you're coming from (although as someone who studies analytic metaphysics I inevitably think there's been some success in the field), but I'd still argue there's a lot of potentially useful pre-analytic philosophy that's missed by placing such a heavy emphasis on germanic thinkers (great as people like Kant and Spinoza may be). I've got my own biases, admittedly, which point me towards missing out on someone like Hume when recommending Kant as a detriment to fully understanding Kant's Critical project, since quite a few things in Kant are a response to Hume's ideas. Beyond that I think reading people like Descartes or Aquinas is generally good practice if you're getting into History of Philosphy.
>>24110727> I think doing it this way allows for the 1st reading to be accomodated, too, in a very loose sense, given that it allows for philosophy to also be a tool for the sciences as the Logical Positivists envisioned it, although you'd absolutely need to get rid of the clause that metaphysical questions are nonsensical. I 100% agree with this reading of things, in a controlled academic environment where the department leadership is on board. My advice is biased towards an American perspective, and you'll get what you are referring to in a department thats committed to pragmatism.>(although as someone who studies analytic metaphysics I inevitably think there's been some success in the field)I dont disagree with this either, but I assume you would agree that this is becoming increasingly rare in US and British departments. I didnt go to many conferences when I was in uni, but it seemed like you had hardcore "metaphysics isn't real and the problems of language are solved with math and or logic" analytic departments, completely separate continental departments, and a handful of interdisciplinary departments that are working in the tradition of Husserl but often with a bias for pragmatism. If you are trying to get a handle on all of this by yourself, I think you are likely to fall into ideological pitfalls if you stray too far away from the history of metaphysics into the path towards positivism or on the inverse something like Marxism or Sartrean thought. Youre going to necessarily need to consult secondary literature as a hobbyist, and its probably a lot better for someone trying to learn philosophy to turn towards Houlgate compared to Russel.
Have fun and disregard anyone on this godforsaken site who wants to keep you away from your journey.
>>24111196>I dont disagree with this either, but I assume you would agree that this is becoming increasingly rare in US and British departments. I didnt go to many conferences when I was in uni, but it seemed like you had hardcore "metaphysics isn't real and the problems of language are solved with math and or logic" analytic departments, completely separate continental departments, and a handful of interdisciplinary departments that are working in the tradition of Husserl but often with a bias for pragmatism.Metaphysics is definitely a niche discipline in most of the Philosophy departments I'm aware of, that's true. I'm currently studying in a department with a heavy emphasis on the Philosophy of Mind, which seems somewhat common. My experience differs in that I don't see the prevaling attitude as outright dismissing metaphysics since even the most hardcore Empiricists I've met acknowledge Logical Positivism is a failed concept. There's definitely a bias in the sorts of metaphysics studied, though, stuff like David Lewis' work on many worlds, mereology, the ontology of properties, and so on. My area of research is personal identity, which is another popular topic in that field.
>>24105810
>>24111414Kys, cringelord J*w.
>>24111415You on the right
>>24111414Not even awful suggestions, they're both essentially mass market versions of Nietzsche and very short books. Honestly ideal for someone that's just starting out, although I'd also add The Meditations and The Republic
>>24111415Denounce the Torah
>>24105785You are an idiot. >>24105810The History of Philosophy without any gaps>>24111414retardation incarnate >>24111430the highest level of retardation humanly possible, you are embarrassing yourself and annoying me, kill yourself.
>>24105931>Even if one disagrees with many of its positions (as I do, by the way), it is still is an interesting read. I would entirely skip both the Frankfurt School and the Analyticals; they have contributed to philosophy as much as the sophists did.The "traditionalists" are nothing but sophists selling a product to rubes.
