S
sidetrack
Guest
I’ve been wondering if that “infinite monkey theorem” about a monkey hitting keys at random on a typewriter keyboard for an infinite amount of time will almost surely type the complete works of William Shakespeare if instead maybe they would start writing Western philosophy starting with Plato and not the pre-Socratic stuff.Haha maybe that’s a sign that the monkeys would start thinking more human like,eh?.If that happened in my mind I would be like “
Oh dear,…hear we go agian !”.
Also I’ve noticed that while Eastern philosophy more is fascinating esp.when it comes to epistemology and the ethics and morals IMO/AFAIK it tends to be lacking in political and legal philosophy (seeing as how East and South Asian countries b4 European colonialism where under fuedal a/o monarchistic government) and it doesn’t seem to say much about economic philosophy which I think is prob.a result of the social and psychological implications of the different types of monarchism like whether it was the supposedly religious justifications for India’s caste system or the somewhat religious basis of Confucianism in East Asian monarchs and not really being able to* go beyond that stuff* in the sense of developing the philosophy like Aristole did with his teacher’s.
I found out that early analytical philosophy was agianest metaphysics (early on at least) and was trying the put logic back in the drivers seat of philosophy after the ruins left in the 19th century (mostly by Nietzche along) with Marx saying it was done and Henri Bergson trying to fix things up.
Some quotes from the philosophy book I finished up
“In science and metaphysics he [Immanuel Kant] said that human kind starts off with data which is worked on and gives rise to a judgement,the process being similar”
“At this point we introduce one of the unwritten laws of philosophy:The greater the complexity or obscurity of a philosopher,the greater the likelihood of widely differing interpretations HENCE THE NECCESITY FOR THE CATEGORICAL INTERPRETATION."read any philosopher as if the interpretation you make were to become,through your interpretation,a general philosophical law”…]you have to agree on what they mean [in this particular case Kant and Hegel] before you can disagree."
“Her [Simone de Beauvoir’s]* seminal book The Second Sex (1949) opened up a new wave of feminism that also questioned philosophy from its lack of understanding of the historical and specific nature of women’s oppression.From Socrates to Satre women had been philosophically invisible as a question.This was rather strange as they seemed to constitute rather a large proportion of humankind*…]This really was a major problem that wasn’t going away.If philosophy constructed women as the “other” in relation to men,and therefore as subservient,then philosophy itself was failing to conceptualize the conditions under which it operated.”
“Structuralism was anti-humanist and anti-existentialist [an interesting, underrated, overlooked and more recent alternative to those two over rated stances IMO].For stuructualists it was not man who created meaning though language but language which speaks man.The free will debate of humanist philosophy was negated by the concept off a system that wrote people in pre-determined scripts.Everything is fixed at the level of the system,not the individual expressing what they think are rational independent thoughts.In other words language constitutes reality for us rather than our creating reality through our use of language[personally this reminds me of John 1:1].Reality becomes the Prison House of Language.Lacan said we acquire culture as we learn language.Who we are becomes a question of the person who enters into the structures of language.The unconscious part of us is another structure of language.*”
"In exposing the ‘mask of masculinity’ that philosophy wears feminism has helped to undermine the certainties that philosophy often aspired to…]Some feminists argue that a whole new language,a women’s language must be invented in which to rethink the whole of philosophy."
Oh dear,…hear we go agian !”.Also I’ve noticed that while Eastern philosophy more is fascinating esp.when it comes to epistemology and the ethics and morals IMO/AFAIK it tends to be lacking in political and legal philosophy (seeing as how East and South Asian countries b4 European colonialism where under fuedal a/o monarchistic government) and it doesn’t seem to say much about economic philosophy which I think is prob.a result of the social and psychological implications of the different types of monarchism like whether it was the supposedly religious justifications for India’s caste system or the somewhat religious basis of Confucianism in East Asian monarchs and not really being able to* go beyond that stuff* in the sense of developing the philosophy like Aristole did with his teacher’s.
I found out that early analytical philosophy was agianest metaphysics (early on at least) and was trying the put logic back in the drivers seat of philosophy after the ruins left in the 19th century (mostly by Nietzche along) with Marx saying it was done and Henri Bergson trying to fix things up.
Some quotes from the philosophy book I finished up
“In science and metaphysics he [Immanuel Kant] said that human kind starts off with data which is worked on and gives rise to a judgement,the process being similar”
“At this point we introduce one of the unwritten laws of philosophy:The greater the complexity or obscurity of a philosopher,the greater the likelihood of widely differing interpretations HENCE THE NECCESITY FOR THE CATEGORICAL INTERPRETATION."read any philosopher as if the interpretation you make were to become,through your interpretation,a general philosophical law”…]you have to agree on what they mean [in this particular case Kant and Hegel] before you can disagree."
“Her [Simone de Beauvoir’s]* seminal book The Second Sex (1949) opened up a new wave of feminism that also questioned philosophy from its lack of understanding of the historical and specific nature of women’s oppression.From Socrates to Satre women had been philosophically invisible as a question.This was rather strange as they seemed to constitute rather a large proportion of humankind*…]This really was a major problem that wasn’t going away.If philosophy constructed women as the “other” in relation to men,and therefore as subservient,then philosophy itself was failing to conceptualize the conditions under which it operated.”
“Structuralism was anti-humanist and anti-existentialist [an interesting, underrated, overlooked and more recent alternative to those two over rated stances IMO].For stuructualists it was not man who created meaning though language but language which speaks man.The free will debate of humanist philosophy was negated by the concept off a system that wrote people in pre-determined scripts.Everything is fixed at the level of the system,not the individual expressing what they think are rational independent thoughts.In other words language constitutes reality for us rather than our creating reality through our use of language[personally this reminds me of John 1:1].Reality becomes the Prison House of Language.Lacan said we acquire culture as we learn language.Who we are becomes a question of the person who enters into the structures of language.The unconscious part of us is another structure of language.*”
"In exposing the ‘mask of masculinity’ that philosophy wears feminism has helped to undermine the certainties that philosophy often aspired to…]Some feminists argue that a whole new language,a women’s language must be invented in which to rethink the whole of philosophy."
.Then read the more modern thinkers.