choose your weapon...

Movies (4) Photos. (47) Poetry (16) Quotations. (76) Words (15) Writings. (137)

Sunday, December 13, 2009

seriously WTF?

I made the mistake of meandering on over to some blogs in the self-proclaimed “philosophy” category… and suddenly feel a whole lot like a retard at an advanced physics lecture. What the fuck are these people really talking about?… and more importantly… why does philosophy seek to exclude anyone who hasn't memorized the entire dictionary? Below I’ve compiled a list of all the sentences I could find that are either (a) kind-of confusing or (b) completely fucked. Leaning heavily towards (c) incomprehensible, and in turn, transformed them into either (a) not-so confusing or (b) so fucking simple.

“Rational entitlement to comprehension is not generated solely by present experience, but by experience in conjunction with the prior metaphysical and experiential standing of the subject.”
a.k.a. Knowledge comes not only from what is happening now, but also from previous thoughts, experience and opinion.

“Experience is seen as analogous to a function or ‘argument schema’, such as modus ponens, which maps subjective views onto judgments.”
a.k.a. Experience is similar to the design of a simple if-then argument, when judgment is combined with only one side of the story. 

“The resulting theory aims to remain entirely neutral on ontological issues whilst enabling experience to make a rational contribution to knowledge despite its non-propositional structure.”
a.k.a. The result remains neutral on the existence of God, and at the same time relates experience to knowledge, despite the theories lack of proven truth.

Maybe it's a natural arrogance that comes with the subject, or maybe it's a way to try and avoid misinterpretation by creating new, impossibly complicated ways to twist simple ideas into a mess of the least used words in the average vocabulary, but whatever the reason... it's completely unnecessary. Makes a little more sense that the idiots of the world seem to stay idiots. No one smart enough to change their minds can speak the same language."Yes Billy Bob" says Mr. Philosopher "the adherence to questionable methodological principles seems to be motivated more by a desire for logical tidiness and consistency than phenomenological accuracy.I'm sure he knows exactly what you mean.


obsquatch said...

I hesitate to articulate for fear of deviating from the path of rectitude - or - I don't know what the hell you are talking about, so I'm gonna keep my god damned mouth shut.

Michael said...

You may notice that the examples you gave, once you'd translated them, were very simple and straightforward. They were also obvious observations that have been stated many times before.
And that, dear Heather, is the reason for the high-falutin' obfuscation. In order to be taken seriously by other philosophers, not to mention getting published, receiving grants, and earning tenure, a philosopher is required to come up with new thoughts, or failing that, to at least find new ways of dimantling old ones.
And that is very hard to do. Philosophy is an old discipline, and one relying almost entirely on internal factors. (Philosophy dealing with the external world long ago split off into the new field of Science.) And by this age, pretty much every potential rational means (and most irrational means) of explaining ideas has already been formulated.
It is extremely rare that anyone originates anything truly creative in Philosophy. Mostly they just regurgitate all the same old ideas.
So to dress them up, and sound deep and meaningfull, they load their sentences with multisyllabic words, in many overlapping dependant clauses, and they pray that people take so long to pick through the sentences to decipher the meaning, that they refuse to notice how trite and cliche everything is. Because to do so would make the reader feel stupid, having taken so long to comprehend ideas so basic, and most people would rather believe something is deep and profound, than to entertain the thought that they might be dense.

I took a very long time to say that, even though what I said isn't all that complex. And I used a lot of multisyllabic words and several commas. I guess my own thesis condemns me somewhat.
Oh well.

A long-winded statement on Philosophy.... I've become Lupine.
Uhm... pee on me... I want to lick the floor.. Uh, forget it. Sick, perverted things only sound cool when he says them. I guess I just don't have his style.

chaser said...

mmm...I liked this one...girl got game

Random said...

Lacan uses the term ‘textual dematerialism’ to denote the bridge between sexual identity and language. D’Erlette holds that we have to choose between dialectic nihilism and deconstructive rationalism.

Thus, the characteristic theme of Geoffrey’s analysis of textual dematerialism is not discourse per se, but prediscourse. A number of sublimations concerning dialectic nihilism exist.
randomly generated by the Postmodernism Generator

Hermgirl said...

What Michael said--thanks! I'd always wondered about that, and it never occurred to me that it was all about money. Now that I think about it, I don't know why it hadn't dawned on me earlier.

You'd think with an honorable discipline like philosophy, it wouldn't come down to that...but I guess I can't say philosophy is really that honorable now, can I?

Michael said...

Well, Hermgirl, I don't think it's ONLY about money. It's also about prestige and University politics.

zpconn said...

I'd say it's much more about keeping one's job than it is about money.

Philosophers--even the employed ones--don't make much money and don't choose the career with the intention of ever making much money. But it's hard to do philosophy--that is, read philosophy, study philosophy, write about philosophy, teach philosophy, and attempt to make original contributions--without an environment that pays you enough to live off of in return for doing these things.

In summary: philosophers are one of the groups least motivated by money, and whatever linguistic atrocities they commit they do in order to continue teaching, reading, and studying.

(Yes, yes, there are always exceptions.)

Anonymous said...

Good brief and this post helped me alot in my college assignement. Thanks you as your information.

if you happen to be a billionaire...