instagram teens haven't been to Epstein's parties, they're not woke educated academics
10/10 on the :jesse-wtf: scale.
Witnessing a historical run here.
Trying to understand this while also suffering from both poor sleep and too much Benedryl feels like an out of body experience
I understood the first half then the sentence went off the rails, sprouted wings and flew to the land of madness
Debate is a huge thing. High school debaters are frequently reading arguments which utilize Deleuze, Foucault, Lacan, Fanon, and pretty much anyone you can think of.
Is... this what high school is like outside of the us??
its simple
everytime i do one push up, i read a book from a philosopher
on average i do 10 push ups a day
okay this makes much more sense
That's what my policy debate team was like, and which I think is representative of much of the teams around the US. It's definitely a strange dynamic. Kids aren't really given any sort of intro to all these thinkers and they are then thrown into the muck as listed in that quote. I think a big part of it is college debate spreading its influence down into high school.
Can't say it's the healthiest thing, you hear a lot of stories about kids who get their brain fried and later take up hard drugs.
In the other hand there's the non-k teams who all end up as politicians.
did u baby-brains even read all the prerequisites in the course catalogue??? did you?? did you!!!
how could you understand x if you dont read y z & c????
shut the fuck up academic gatekeeper :blob-stop:
Gatekeeping Deleuze instagrammmers on my Deleuze subreddit without a hint of irony :fedora:
one page of wittgenstein is worth a thousand pages of deloser or 100 lifetimes of mold posts.
Lmao just be happy anybody at all is interested in your navel gazing bullshit.
I tried to read some Deleuze but couldn't get past the first few pages it felt like reading complete gibberish, why do they have to write like that? Are there really no easier ways to express the same ideas?
Most of that school seems like complete gibberish to me, and I have a PhD in philosophy. There are definitely easier ways to express their ideas. It's not just you.
That's a little more broad than I intended. I'm not a big fan of the continentals, but I don't think they're all gibberish--Kant is difficult (and I disagree with much of what he says), but I don't think the Critiques are gibberish. I was more referring to the Deluze-Guatarri-Derrida-Baudrillard axis of (mostly) French post-structuralist and post-structuralist-adjacent stuff. I find it almost entirely incomprehensible to read, and even when the points are explained to me by someone who really knows their stuff, they rarely seem all that deep or profound. There are some exceptions here and there, but in general I find that tradition to be an awful lot of light with very little heat.
well, imo any of the continentals, even the more obscuritarian ones, are a lot more valuable than anything analytic philosophy has to offer. (Valuable here means valuable to revolutionary politics) Im not a big fan of the post-structuralists either, but I think they do at least offer a meaningful perspective. On the other hand, what does analytic philosophy have to offer? Chomsky? His critique was basically just "I can't understand your writings and you are just trying to sound smart." I really don't know why people take that guy seriously at all...
Oh, 100%. There's virtually no serious engagement with revolutionary politics in the mainstream analytic tradition. Most professional philosophy across the board is just garbage, and I say that as a professional philosopher. I mostly do fairly niche foundation of climate science and complexity stuff, though, so I have little contact with either mainstream analytic or continental stuff. I was going to say that my professional work is basically separate from my political engagement, but that's not exactly true: I radicalized in large part because of my work on climate science.
i'm confused, I always thought PMC was private military corp
fraud teens pretending to understand fraud "philosophy" better than fraud academics. all morons.
i'm an environmental STEM lord, but have read enough Marx, Gramsci, and Cronon for my own enrichment to take a taco bell-sized dump on anybody's dissertation in a single meme with less than a dozen words.
obviously a CV should punch up the details and make diamonds out of corpses, but the only people who earnestly care about academic pedigree and formal prestige are the institutionally inbred.
