4 posts tagged with philosophy by nasreddin.
Displaying 1 through 4 of 4.

Related tags:
+ (75)
+ (47)
+ (35)
+ (34)
+ (26)
+ (24)
+ (24)
+ (23)
+ (23)
+ (21)
+ (21)
+ (20)
+ (19)
+ (19)
+ (19)
+ (17)
+ (16)
+ (14)
+ (14)
+ (14)
+ (14)
+ (14)
+ (13)
+ (13)
+ (13)
+ (12)
+ (12)
+ (12)
+ (12)
+ (12)
+ (11)
+ (11)
+ (10)
+ (10)
+ (10)
+ (10)
+ (10)
+ (9)
+ (9)
+ (9)
+ (9)
+ (9)
+ (8)
+ (8)
+ (8)
+ (8)
+ (8)
+ (8)
+ (8)
+ (8)
+ (7)
+ (7)
+ (7)
+ (7)
+ (7)
+ (7)
+ (7)
+ (7)
+ (7)
+ (7)


Users that often use this tag:
homunculus (38)
anotherpanacea (22)
Gyan (19)
kliuless (17)
y2karl (13)
painquale (13)
shivohum (9)
empath (6)
Kattullus (6)
semmi (5)
0bvious (5)
Trurl (4)
cthuljew (4)
Rhaomi (4)
Joe Beese (4)
LobsterMitten (4)
nasreddin (4)
daksya (4)
escabeche (4)
matteo (4)
netbros (4)
the man of twists ... (4)
Tlogmer (3)
MiguelCardoso (3)
Sticherbeast (3)
moonbird (3)
Brandon Blatcher (3)
Wolfdog (3)
Blazecock Pileon (3)
ageispolis (3)
amyms (3)
Obscure Reference (3)
ornate insect (3)
Lutoslawski (3)
troll (3)
Jonathan Livengood (3)
philipy (2)
Rory Marinich (2)
MultiplyDrafted (2)
colinmarshall (2)
Potomac Avenue (2)
daniel_charms (2)
fearfulsymmetry (2)
hydatius (2)
l33tpolicywonk (2)
Abiezer (2)
saulgoodman (2)
jason's_planet (2)
grobstein (2)
scalefree (2)
MetaMonkey (2)
voltairemodern (2)
infini (2)
Roach (2)
zarq (2)
fleetmouse (2)
The Thnikkaman (2)
kenko (2)
TheophileEscargot (2)
swift (2)

Participants and Spectators

Suppose ... that the right picture is that characters who take themselves to be deliberating and initiating various deeds come to look like somewhat pathetic figures frantically pulling various wires and pushing various buttons which are, unknown to them, not connected to some moving machine they are riding, on a course completely indifferent to anything such characters pretend to do (or much more indifferent than the riders believe) ... The first thing to say is that this is not an academic exercise. The problem I want to raise has become especially interesting in the last hundred and fifty years or so, because, under the influences, first, of the so-called “Masters of Suspicion” – Marx, Nietzsche and Freud – and in our own day under the influence of everything from structuralism and various “anti-humanisms” in European philosophy to evolutionary biology and the neurosciences (experimental results, brain imaging, Benjamin Libet’s famous experiment and so forth), many seem to have concluded that in an ever expanding range of cases, it only seems to us that we are “running any show” as conscious agents in any even metaphysically modest sense; it only seems that we could be actually leading our lives.
posted by nasreddin on Apr 20, 2010 - 104 comments

 

All Too Human

One should speak only when one may not remain silent; and then speak only of that which one has overcome—everything else is chatter, "literature," lack of breeding. My writings speak only of my overcomings: "I" am in them, together with everything that was hostile to me.
On January 3, 1889, Friedrich Nietzsche walked into the Piazza Carlo Alberto in Turin and saw a horse, fallen, beaten brutally by its master. Nietzsche embraced it, and thereafter never regained his reason. The story might be mythical, or borrowed. If so, it is hardly alone; myths about Nietzsche--his Nazism, his syphilis--seem to confirm his dictum that "truths are illusions which we have forgotten are illusions." But separating the man from the myth is impossible: Nietzsche was Zarathustra, he was Heraclitus. Like his ancient antecedents, he spoke in aphorisms and hymns, in fragments; like a bird, he fled south for the winter. "Only a fool, only a poet..."
posted by nasreddin on Sep 13, 2007 - 74 comments

Is Philosophy a Language Game?

§7. Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent.
Ludwig Wittgenstein is such a contradictory figure that there are, in professional philosophical usage, two of him. Wittgenstein I had solved every philosophical problem in his Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus (1921); having nothing else to do, he went home to Austria and became, unsuccessfully, a schoolteacher. In 1929, Wittgenstein I returned to Cambridge, where he began his transformation into Wittgenstein II. He was no longer confident in the Tractatus, his certainty in any answers less firm. Wittgenstein II's great, posthumous, work was the Philosophical Investigations. But Wittgenstein the living man was one, not two: musician and architect, reader of mysteries and engineer. "If philosophy has anything to do with wisdom," he once wrote, "there's certainly not a grain of that in Mind, and quite often a grain in the detective stories."
posted by nasreddin on Sep 7, 2007 - 52 comments

Like A Face Drawn in Sand at the Edge of the Sea

A society without power relations can only be an abstraction. Which, be it said in passing, makes all the more politically necessary the analysis of power relations in a given society, their historical formation, the source of their strength or fragility, the conditions which are necessary to transform some or to abolish others. For to say that there cannot be a society without power relations is not to say either that those which are established are necessary or, in any case, that power constitutes a fatality at the heart of societies, such that it cannot be undermined. Instead, I would say that the analysis, elaboration, and bringing into question of power relations and the "agonism" between power relations and the intransitivity of freedom is a permanent political task inherent in all social existence.
"Saint" Michel Foucault (1926-1984) transformed Western thought. Institutions -- prisons, asylums, clinics -- define the rhythm of our daily existence; Foucault found that they also determine the way we think. The search for the political and philosophical implications of this insight led him to biology and economics, linguistics and the study of sexuality. In Foucault's eyes, intellectual activity, however radical, could never be divorced from the techniques of power. This is why some have accused him of political quietism. Other critics say he was simply a bad scholar. Who was the real Foucault? "Anarchist, leftist, ostentatious or disguised Marxist, nihilist, explicit or secret anti-Marxist, technocrat in the service of Gaullism, new liberal," gay saint, charlatan, or something else entirely? Perhaps we have posed the question incorrectly...
posted by nasreddin on Aug 17, 2007 - 92 comments

Page: 1