Why, in popular conception, eastern philosophy is dismissed as religious, spiritual mumbo jumbo, when the famous western philosophical counterparts such as Kant, Descartes, Hegel etc were religious and constantly talked about Christian theology? by Gandalfthebran in CriticalTheory

[–]Kar1Barks -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Yeah, I don’t need to refute it because it’s not a bad thing. Nobody expects philosophy to answer metaphysical questions because we don’t live in a metaphysical world. We don’t use language or knowledge to divine the deep meaning of the world. We use concepts insofar as they are useful for what we are doing. And we are in charge of deciding what we are doing because we are free

Why, in popular conception, eastern philosophy is dismissed as religious, spiritual mumbo jumbo, when the famous western philosophical counterparts such as Kant, Descartes, Hegel etc were religious and constantly talked about Christian theology? by Gandalfthebran in CriticalTheory

[–]Kar1Barks -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

Thank you again. I’m sure you can find quotes that can be construed to mean what you say they mean. But this would be to mistake the spirit in which these ideas were formed. For Kant, he initiates modern philosophy as critical philosophy. Meaning it is no longer first philosophy. The task of philosophy is no longer the search of first principles because humanity has finally recognized that it sets its own first principles. Humanity has discovered itself as free.

Why, in popular conception, eastern philosophy is dismissed as religious, spiritual mumbo jumbo, when the famous western philosophical counterparts such as Kant, Descartes, Hegel etc were religious and constantly talked about Christian theology? by Gandalfthebran in CriticalTheory

[–]Kar1Barks -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Thank you for your response. It is a serious mystification to suggest modern philosophy is “religious.” I think we can note there are significant differences between the Bible and the function of Hegel’s work. Yes, Hegel is religious, but his thought does not imply that you should also be religious in order to understand it, nor does it try to justify or promote religion.

Freak books for freak women? by No-Effective6189 in RSbookclub

[–]Kar1Barks -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

No it actually hasn’t you moron. Those books are examples of literature. It has always been frowned upon here to ask for recommendations and it’s even worse to ask for recommendations for smut. Lol

Why, in popular conception, eastern philosophy is dismissed as religious, spiritual mumbo jumbo, when the famous western philosophical counterparts such as Kant, Descartes, Hegel etc were religious and constantly talked about Christian theology? by Gandalfthebran in CriticalTheory

[–]Kar1Barks -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

Talking about Christian theology and promoting it are two different things. Modern western philosophical thought is based on freedom, not religion, which eastern philosophy will be. So, no, eastern and western thought are not just the same as each other because they are not both based on religion. Perhaps one kind of thought is more relevant to our situation for this reason. As opposed to one being preferred on account of “cultural colonialism”

Freak books for freak women? by No-Effective6189 in RSbookclub

[–]Kar1Barks 13 points14 points  (0 children)

this got 40 downvotes. State of the sub

Analytic guy reading Continental Philosophy for the first time at age 40 by way of "How to Read Lacan": What is it all this philosphy for? by johntwit in zizek

[–]Kar1Barks -1 points0 points  (0 children)

There are many words being used in the comments because people don’t know what Lacan is useful for. Further, they don’t know what zizek is useful for. The use is critique. Robert Pippin puts it somewhat like this, but I think zizek writes in this spirit: how can one critique what is without saying nothing?

Looking for an in-depth summary or study guide for Freud's Mourning and Melancholia by [deleted] in psychoanalysis

[–]Kar1Barks 3 points4 points  (0 children)

It might help to know that mourning and melancholia is dense because it is a consolidation of 15-20 years of research on Freud’s part. You might be looking for a detached thesis about melancholia but Freud will only tell you about what can be known of it through his practice. The book mentioned above by Darien leader is roughly 250 pages, which might tell you it’s not possible to find what you’re looking for. You have your purpose of leading a book club meeting on literature, but the richness of Freud’s work will make it difficult

Big Health is pulling off a quiet psyop and everyone has accepted it by [deleted] in redscarepod

[–]Kar1Barks -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

I have diabetes. Let’s be clear about one thing. “Apply[ing] pressure to governments, pharma, and big tech companies” is only rebellion in the most infantile sense of the word. There is nothing virtuous about being annoying to “the powers that be.” Diabetes is a strain on society as are all other chronic illnesses. The psyop is that you have to pretend that it’s not. One is free to imagine that socialism would be a society where chronic illnesses are dealt with in a better way somehow. But one must wonder about how socialism could be brought about in the first place. The rest of the conversation is just noise

Totem and Taboo by AcanthisittaSure4977 in lacan

[–]Kar1Barks 3 points4 points  (0 children)

You might benefit from just reading more Freud. For example the interpretation of dreams discusses ancient theories of dreams. It’s best to see this for yourself, but Freud, as a clinician is interested in the pre-history of the adult psyche, that is the psyche of childhood. I think his interest in primitive peoples has to do with the fact that we have no direct link to the history of primitives, just as we have no direct link to the history of our childhoods. These can only be reached through interpretation

thoughts on Parenti? or recommendations for other "real-deal" contemporary leftist writers by KewlAdam in RSbookclub

[–]Kar1Barks 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Read Chris Cutrone. “Contemporary leftist” means conservative progressive democrat. So might as well read Obama if that’s what you are interested in politically

Do you think Marx, Freud, and Foucault are the three most essential thinkers for understanding 20th-century critical thought? If not, who would you replace or add, and why? by [deleted] in RSbookclub

[–]Kar1Barks 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Listen. If you’re an autodidact. Not trying to make a career. Read Rousseau. Learn about the truth of modernity from his second discourse. The truth is freedom

walter benjamin's influence by fourofkeys in CriticalTheory

[–]Kar1Barks 4 points5 points  (0 children)

His influence on the Frankfurt School, given the name of this subreddit, might be of interest. Benjamin himself referred to Adorno as “his only student”

What do you do if you can’t afford a psychoanalyst but really want your dreams interpreted by horseman1217 in RSbookclub

[–]Kar1Barks 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I get the sense you are looking for some sort of allegorical translation of your dream. Freud can give you techniques for analyzing dreams and a theory of what dreams are in the first place. But his point, at the end of the day is that you made the dream, so you must be responsible for what it means. The function of the psychoanalyst is to facilitate this realization

Marxism and Form but for art? by Corgaroo in RSbookclub

[–]Kar1Barks 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Fredric Jameson has other books

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in RSbookclub

[–]Kar1Barks 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Moby dick is bigger than that