ARC150 said:I love philosophy - I even have a degree in it (you should be aware of this since it means all my views are right)
LOL, love it
The "Those of us who frequent this forum" thread
- Thread starter Hubster
- Start date
LOL, love it
ARC150 said:
To what do you attribute the interesting lack of any world-changing philosophy from academia in over forty years?
speed said:
(drinks)
Academia is a business like any other. A popularity contest, not a judgment of what is right.
Anyway, onward to the end of the world.
Short answer: I don't know.infoterror said:
I am curious about the "40 year" stipulation - what would you say was the last "world-changing philosophy?" I don't disagree with you, I am just having trouble thinking of anything that occurred so recently.
My big three for world-changing are Aristotle, Newton and Freud. These are people who radically changed the way we conceptualize the world. (There are others, to be sure [Plato, Descartes, Hume, Marx, Darwin, Einstein, to name a few].)
Is it possible that such wide-sweeping - and as such, world-changing - philosophy is no longer possible? Are we at a point that there is only the possibility of a deeper understanding of general ideas already put forth?
Again, I don't know.
I would say that, at this point, men like Craig Venter (gene sequencing's poster boy) and Edward Mitton (M Theory) are the ones currently changing the way we view the world.
Norsemaiden
barbarian
There are ideas within sociobiology that have the potential to change the world dramatically, but certain people in powerful positions are suppressing it and in the meantime human intelligence and understanding is sliding backwards into world views based on faith, so maybe the sociobiological philosophy, which Nietzsche fits so neatly into, will never achieve its potential.
ARC150 said:
This is betraying my literary bias, but; Shakespeare is someone who radically changed the way humans conceptualized the world. Never before has an artist so understood human nature; and whats more, his prose is so sublime, and inspired, it may never be topped. And one must also note, many philosophers and others like Freud, were profoundly influenced by Shakespeare--philosophical ideas like existentialism, even arguments about free will, all may have been derived from one of his tragedies. Also, one should also include the great composers, the great artists modern and renaissance.
Although culture and art is not as important today as it was in the past, it is supremely important part of man's accomplishments and every bit as important as science and philosophy.
ARC150 said:
I don't trust science because it has no philosophy. Philosophy has not uptaken most of science because science itself is without a coherent value system context. Make things work, not figure out where they fit in the cosmos.
I am an anti-progressive, so I think philosophy has never changed, but we've had a few good people write it down. Schopenhauer, Aristotle, Nietzsche and Aurelius are my personal biggies, but it seems to me at some point that all philosophers of note are basically taking different approaches to the same truth.
40 years? I think that's the last thing of note that Heidegger published. And the last 40 years (1966-2006) of literature, art and music seem to me especially void of meaning. Except black and death metal, of course.
infoterror said:I don't trust science because it has no philosophy. Philosophy has not uptaken most of science because science itself is without a coherent value system context. Make things work, not figure out where they fit in the cosmos.
I am an anti-progressive, so I think philosophy has never changed, but we've had a few good people write it down. Schopenhauer, Aristotle, Nietzsche and Aurelius are my personal biggies, but it seems to me at some point that all philosophers of note are basically taking different approaches to the same truth.
40 years? I think that's the last thing of note that Heidegger published. And the last 40 years (1966-2006) of literature, art and music seem to me especially void of meaning. Except black and death metal, of course.
There has been some excellent literature, art and music. Its just not as inspiring or trend setting--or maybe its cold and verging on being void of meaning.
Well I suppose you have Prendercki--he did compose St. Luke's Passion after 1966 didnt he? Ligeti composed some nice pieces. And of course rock, prog, metal, post rock.
Hm, Saul Bellow did write a few good ones in that time: Herzog published in 1965, Humboldts Gift in the 1970's, Midnights Children by Rushdie, Money and London Fields by Amis. So there is some good lit.
As for art, I'm not a huge art nut, but you do have alot of very famous modern artists since the 1960's.
Demiurge
This user has no title
speed said:
Speaking strictly from my field: the above are unimpressive. Extremely. Formulaic, post-modernist mishmash; can it hold a candle to Burroughs? I thought not.
Not to be bitter, or to sound harsher than I actually am... but I call "bullshit" on this one.
Have you read "Naked Lunch"?
infoterror said:
First, what is your field? And second have you even read any of these authors? You certaintly havent read Bellow as he doesnt write in a post modern style. And what is wrong with postmodern writing anyway?
Second, Its patently ridiculous for you to make such claims. We are both talking about decent serious writers here; no Stephen Kings, Ayn Rand's, J.K. Rowlings, or Ernest Hemingways like most undermen as you call them would bring up. Thus, this whole argument is predicated on subjective literary taste and ones capacity for both reading comprehension and ones knowledge of the writing process itself.
I call bullshit on Burroughs, and I am not at all impressed by his writing--but I do acknowledge his talent. FOr instance, Naked Lunch and Money by Martin Amis are quite similar in setups. But the difference is Amis has a greater command of language, does some interesting things in regards to the form of the novel, and he has a vicious Nabokovian sense of humor; whereas Burroughs is nothing more than obscene. Of course Amis' Yellow Dog and Naked Lunch could be compared as well. But I am surprised you like a pederast like Burroughs
Im quite knowledgable in the realm of literature, and Martin Amis and Rushdie currently have the most interesting and unique prose and they are at the forefront of rethinking the form of literature. Rushdies last three or four books havent been very good, I admit; and he is relying on his heavy Indian-based symbolism for every character.
And how do you consider them formulaic or a mish mash? Thomas Pynchon is mish mash, John Updike, Philip Roth, Norman Mailer, Thomas WOlfe are formulaic in the sense they are long overly detailed pompous writers who write a new or more drawn out autobiography with every novel. J. Coetzee or Micheal Cunningham perhaps both fit your postmodern bill with their heavy handed post modern symbolism to prove social points.
Its all subjective of course, but frankly I think you are a poor reader if you come to these suspect conclusions.
ARC150 said:This is me onstage with Vulgarizer - I am the pretty one on the left:
This is a great photograph (I should mention I love music photography).
What kind of music does your band play? Looks pretty energetic.
derek
Grey Eminence
speed said:
Literature
I have read, and am not fond of, Bellow and Amis; I consider both to be postmodernists for a number of reasons.
I recommend you re-read Naked Lunch. More beautiful language in that than most operas. Of course, it is also obscene, but so is "Gravity's Rainbow."
The only Pynchon I like these days is "The Crying of Lot 49." The rest really is crap -- trendy crap. He's skilled though. I'm not fond of postmodernism, but I think you're up a creek about Thomas Wolfe; he's a bit wordy, but he gives meaning to those words.
Rushdie is simply mediocre.
derek
Grey Eminence
Classical literature aside, I am a complete dumbass when it comes to things to read.
Could either one of you fine gentleman (if you can be bothered) recommend a short list of books I simply must read?
I have a long period off soon, and I'd very much like to engage some good writing.
Could either one of you fine gentleman (if you can be bothered
) recommend a short list of books I simply must read?I have a long period off soon, and I'd very much like to engage some good writing.
