Hi, I’m new to this forum. I have an undergrad degree in Liberal Studies with a minor concentration in Philosophy. With this info, one can deduce that I am not a hard liner in philosophical discussions (what’s a hard liner?). Nevertheless, armed with a mediocre training in philosophy and a naïve disposition, I went ahead and joined one of the online forums. Lo and behold, these are the things I’ve learned:
The analytics dominate the discussions. They use their own methods along with numerous terminologies to discuss practically anything ad nauseum.
I do not use these terms and do not use the methodology they use. After a while, they know “who†you are and that you do “not†know, so they don’t respond to your post.
At one point I was told that I do not understand Nietzsche even though I have read his works. I said ‘I thought Nietzsche wrote to be understood by competent people like me.’ He flatly said ‘No, Nietzsche’s work is really difficult to understand.’ Go figure.
So, I figure no matter how much I try to understand the writings of some philosophers, there would always be some analytics grad who would be more than happy to inform me that I DO NOT Understand.
I’d like to give philosophical discussions one more try.
Thoughts? Correct me if you please. I should be used to it by now.
Weather or not you personally understand Neitzsche is not to the point. If you missunderstand Neitzsche but in the process develop a better position than you win. If someone else can explain Neitzsche to you, and you develop a better position in the process you win agian. If your discussing what a philosopher said all the time, and not bothering about the truth, then you lose- big time.
Sure you wern’t in an Literature major or something? Seems, to me those are the people who care.
I am also a newbie and I know of what you speak. Nevertheless, you should try to look through the eyes of a seasoned philosophy aficionado. Uneducated questions or arguments tend to annoy experts in all kinds of fields. It’s like asking a computer expert how to turn on your PC over and over again. I have also come to understand that if you don’t know the terms and methodology of philosophy discussions it’s hard to make progress. Again, picture a computer expert explaining that you have to forward port 80 from your router to your computer should you wish to run a public webserver. If you don’t know the lingo and underlying concepts communication becomes difficult if not impossible. I certainly have the reputation of being ignorant. Maybe that’s why I decided to go study philosophy next year
Thanks for the input, guys. Another thing that I’d like to add is the blatant snobbery that goes on. I like reading the Stoics and French philosophers, and I would see some posts of analytics bashing these philosophers saying that their works are not even philosophy. It really bothers me that educated people with intelligent mind would say things like these. First of all, I don’t even think these posters have even written a book. I don’t mind to be told, but the way they do it is like they are the gods of philosophy majors. I suppose humility is a rare commodity in philosophy.
Cuboidz, what subjects in philosophydo you plan to take?
If they are putting on airs, the’ve something to hide.
Apparently they live in fear of being exposed as a fake, and the best defense is a good offense.
I don’t know why folks get so hung up on Nietzche, his philosophy has not led us from the darkness and that alone should fade him into obscurity, but for the lack of anybody else to justify a class.
I think finding intellectualls who don’t condescend to speak to the obviously ignorant are the best kind, then we ain’t gotta listen to 'em and their claptrap.
To respond to someone who may dismiss what you consider philosophy, all you really have to ask for is their definition of philosophy (you’ll find - if you haven’t already - this is a daunting task). If you ever agree upon one, then the other would presumably have to retract the statement. Otherwise, you have 2 choices, maybe more…but the two are, 1) decide to assert you def’n and continue discussion, or 2) decide for some reason, you have no wish to do #1 with that particular person at that time.
This may be borderline victim to your own criticism…but I will give you the benefit of the doubt on this one. Either way, you’re attacking the person here, not the flawed method. Why do you believe writing books should measure any more than just the number of books one’s written?
I am refreshed with your statement that you “don’t mind to be told”. You’re one of the few I’ve found that may follow a similar principle that when one agree’s with something, it is then when one must attempt to disprove it most. As for the “gods of philosophy majors”, I agree since I’ve made similar observations for certain philosophy majors and otherwise.
Hi! marie,
From your voice it seems to me as if you’re a guy, are you? Our profile doesn’t let us state that anywhere and I think that is sometimes a must. Anyways…
Don’t get worried about bashing, don’t you know by now that the only people who bash are the ones who don’t like your excellent posts? Some will bash in a way, they won’t even respond and that will make you feel insecure. Just have faith in yourself, remember that to an already excellent post not much is out there to respond. By the way there is no such thing as humility on a philosophical forum or false modesty, just speak your thoughts and speak from your heart, someone gets hurt say sorry! There is no shortage of words. Someone annoys you, give them tit for tat and do it right away so you don’t bother yourself and let them get a mighty head.
Moreover, a philosopher is not by subject or degrees, he/she’s by heart and mind. Your false modesty that you’re a minor in philosophy doesn’t click here. Do you or don’t you want to philosophise? Then let that be your guide! If someone is a snob here, avoid them or do the same to them, it’s your choice. As for analyzing philosophers, I don’t agree with much of what Ayn Rand says, but when I argue it may sometimes come up as too strong, it doesn’t mean I mean to bash anybody, sometimes people have strong views and sometimes they don’t, but it seems like that to others, you can’t control that, stick to your point. No one can really make another look small or bash another unless they themselves allow that to happen.
And most important of all, we “posters” may not have “written a book” but our analysis may be even more profound than many known previous philosophers, remember that. Just because there have been good philosophers in the past doesn’t make us fools, we could be even better. And don’t give philosophy the name of snobbery because it is never that, there are always different perspectives, that’s why philosophy is here. If you don’t like something or someone the way they responded, either don’t respond to them or do the same but don’t worry yourself and don’t leave, if you do, it will only be your choice.
Analytic philosphy, while at times useful, is generally crap. Stick with the French, Germans and Americans (at least for the moderns) and the Greeks and Chinese (for the ancients) and you’ll do fine. So, fuck the English, and stick to what you know. You’ll come out better in the long run (Although you should read Russell, Whitehead, Austin, et al).
anarchistangel
I’m thinking about what you said about philosophers not being condescending–this would be wonderful I think.
o.i.c.
Great advice, indeed! And yes, I admit I was attacking the person when I said they haven’t even written a book—I threw that in to be mean. ‘Won’t happen again. But one must ponder—writing a book is a daunting, tedious, dedicated task. Anyway…
BeenaJain
No, I’m a female. Actually several others also think that I’m a guy based on my writing. Okay, maybe I’ve been honing this skill to sound like a guy—that’s my confession. Which takes me to the next thing I want to say: The last time I “spoke†my thoughts, I used a lot of F*** and sh** and for days I regretted it—sounds like total maniac. Now all I do is disagree but with reservation—I’d like to think the other guy might have a point that I do not see. Great advice, BeenaJain.
hermes the thrice great
Thanks for the list—I definitely will get these books. That makes my hunt much easier. Never thought about ancient Chinese before—now I’m challenged. Just wonderin’, are these also your favorite books? And how much of these have you actually read? The reason I ask is that all the books I’ve read I never got to finish—maybe half or two-thirds, but rarely I read cover to cover if it’s a philosophy book—maybe I should now. Is this half-ass or what?
Although I am one of the people affected by this statement I thoroughly agree. I don’t post frequently because every time I do I feel I’m talking out of my ass anyway. This doesn’t depress me or anything, on the contrary, it motivates me to study harder. I got past the phase in which an aspiring philosopher wants to philosophize for the heck of it.
Well you gotta admit, the contentals are a bit… weak. Let’s ignore all decent arguement and say it’s obvious that we are free. Umm, no. You can’t do that. Philosophy is a strange thing because humility, in terms of admitting your ignorance, is critically important, but humbley accepting arguements with flaws is pretty bad. (Although, if the flaws are minor and easily fixed one should simply do so instead of dweeling on them.)
philosophy isn’t supposed to lead you to nirvana. you’re thinking of buddhism or hinduism or something… i don’t know. doing some actual reading of actual philosophers might be a good place to start if you’re still attempting just to “figure out what its all about”. don’t rely on your own vague impressions and what people have told you. and don’t let people like whitelotus make you think that there are “real answers” out there to be dug up. don’t let him convince you that its pointless.
whitelotus, an actually decent insight about Nietzsche! i’m proud of you buddy.
Yeah, I gots no degree, nor am I even what might be considered well read, and I do tend to pop off, at times, but all I ask is tell me why I’m wrong. I’m open minded.
Isn’t buddhism and hinduism both examples of philosophies with the intent of paridise on earth?
Practical efforts at theories are pointless without a goal.
I know too well what it’s all about.
I know that the answers are inside of me, and I’m not looking for answers, I’m looking for some cooperation in instituting utopia.
Perhaps it’s just me, but pointless exercises in memorization don’t exite me any more than taking pointless tests to prove I remember.
And if it ain’t fun I ain’t doin’ it.
Most of the philosophy I have read answered questions I didn’t ask, and left blank those I did ask.
Don’t give up so soon. Perhaps your expectations are a bit high. People will respond if they are interested in what you had to say.
If they don’t too bad.
Some people only ever seem to say that they know best (sometimes they do). So what? Once you know somebody is always like that and never shares any of this ‘hidden’ knowledge you just skip their posts.
You shouldn’t be put off by all this, well it’s up to yourself to judge if you’re getting enough out of this. I don’t think you’re ever going to get to a philosophical discussion without people involved that you preceive to be assholes. But, even if somebody seems like an asshole, they might actual be saying a lot of interesting stuff that you are perhaps not taking in because you’re put off by their style of conversation.