Is contemporary philosophy worth getting into or are they (contemporary philosophers) too human to take seriously, in a way? Where do I start? I don't even mean popular philosophers, but the people in the literal trenches and maybe even younger than myself at this point.
>>24978647i think i read about one contemporary philosopher who was essentially a vegan who thinks he's good at arguing because he makes arguments that he finds convicing and doesn't make arguments he doesn't find convincing. in short, no, they're all idiots who know how to climb the ranks of academia by having hip opinionshttps://fakenous.substack.com/p/great-philosophers
>>24978676so... bog man? particles arranged table-wise? bald naturalism? that stuff?
>>24978676that must be why I'm at the bottom because my opinions are completely out of left field
Lance Bush and Kane B are two people posting on YouTube who also have doctorates in philosophy that I think are quite good, and through them you can find all about other contemporary philosophers as that's their main interest. They are however from the analytic/anglo-american school and the analytic/continental split has really badly fucked contemporary philosophy
>>24978761I didn't mean to imply some kind of ridiculous power ranking over mere preference about how to live life, but I guess I should have
>>24978766yeah, probably.
>>24978765well, the implication has been unleashed
>>24978676Its incredible that he is so hated as you not even being able to mention his name. If you know who it is, you know exactly who it is.
>>24978784care to shed some light on who it is? i was under the assumption it was the person linked
>>24978784i didn't remember his name, i had to search my browser history for the articlehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Huemer
you deserve the best possible start, simple as
>>24978676>https://fakenous.substack.com/p/great-philosophersI took one look at his analysis of Thrasymachus's argument and realized that he's retarded. Who's paying this person?
This image was made by some chud who wastes all the money he makes at his 60 hr a week back-breaking tradie job on memecoinsI wonder what the odds are that he seethes about all the women (who surprise surprise went to college) in publishing on here
>>24979204the university of boulder;>>24978804>>24979230>he seethes about all the women (who surprise surprise went to college) in publishing on hereimagine going to college to learn about judith butler or from this dipshit;https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_HuemerUHMMM INSECTS DON'T HAVE BRAINS SO IT'S ETHICAL!!! argument nobody cares about for shit nobody wants
>>24979230what about this image?
>>24978647Pic Rel. You could also try reading Sebastian Rodl though I dont care for him very much.
>>24978765>the analytic/continental split has really badly fucked contemporary philosophyI'm sorry but this is entirely the fault of the Analytic philosophers. Continental philosophy has demonstrated itself to be incredibly welcoming to other fields, drawing heavily on psychoanalysis, literature, art, music, etc, and is more than willing to engage with anyone or anything of interest.The Analytics are some of the most incurious people in the world. When asked about reading Kant in a Q&A, Kane B shuddered and petulantly made known his lack of interest, following up with a story about how his most hated philosopher is Plato. When asked about reading any theory at all, Chomsky got upset and said he can't see the point.
>>24980433>I'm sorry but this is entirely the fault of the Analytic philosophers. Continental philosophy has demonstrated itself to be incredibly welcoming to other fields, drawing heavily on psychoanalysis, literature, art, music, etc,>psychoanalysis, literature, art, music, etc,You're so accomodating you don't even do real philosophy anymore.>The Analytics are some of the most incurious people in the world. When asked about reading Kant in a Q&A, Kane BLiterally who? You seem entirely out of touch with the history of analytic philosophy, as they've been talking about Kant for more than half a century now. Plenty of the EARLIEST proponents of Analytic Philosophy were neo-kantians of a sort, specifically Carnap and Frege. The biggest boom in "analytic philosophy" the past decade or two has been in readings of Hegel. See Brandom's A Spirit of Trust: A Reading of Hegel’s Phenomenology as an example, which he just published a few years back, but he's been lecturing on Hegel for well over a decade as he's been writing the book.
>>24980433>When asked about reading any theory at all, ChomskyChomsky certainly isn't an analytic philosopher. He's not a philospher at all in fact. It's telling you don't even talk about a single analytic thinker in your post. For all the complaints about "the analytics being incurious" you don't have the faintest clue of what you're talking about. How about you get your head out of your ass and read Wilfrid Sellars.
>>24978647"Contemporary philosophy" is just a black and white reel of some dumb roid monkey doing arm presses sitting down with some dogshit text about making money or being "alpha" over it in white letters while a sad, mysterious tuba toots in the background.Philosophy is dead.
>>24978647FTFY
