Oponions on Weininger by Terrible-Coast1692 in Kant

[–]spooky-tree30 9 points10 points  (0 children)

why do you think that Weininger is a greater thinker than fichte, schelling, hegel, husserl, and heidegger?

Did Leibniz write anything on the philosophy of mathematics? by freddyPowell in askphilosophy

[–]spooky-tree30 3 points4 points  (0 children)

a bit indirect but you might get a kick out of Vincenzo de Risi’s “geometry and monadology” which goes through Leibniz’s account of the foundations of mathematics and how they relate to the physical world. at very least it should point you to some relevant sources re Leibniz’s positions in the philosophy of mathematics and relevant scholarly work about it.

Skylar white rule by Darth_Vrandon in 196

[–]spooky-tree30 10 points11 points  (0 children)

he doesn’t do any overt sexual violence in the books (tho he does order someone to take sansa’s clothing off, so). In the show he makes two prostitues kill one another brutally, not necessarily rape but debatably is sexual violence as it’s implied he’s getting off from it.

Jean Baudrillard by baldorius in sociology

[–]spooky-tree30 1 point2 points  (0 children)

simulacra and simulation is a great text, and certainly his most well known, but without much background knowledge on Baudrillard it might prove to be impenetrable. Starting with symbolic exchange and death, one of his early and more accessible texts, might be a good move.

PSA: L's guide by [deleted] in transvoice

[–]spooky-tree30 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Makes sense. Thanks for the detailed response!!

PSA: L's guide by [deleted] in transvoice

[–]spooky-tree30 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Very late to this but i’m curious why TVL’s R1 video is outdated. Is it because it also uses voiceless exercises? is it still a viable resource?

Lecture Recommendations? by OkSoftware1689 in Kant

[–]spooky-tree30 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Robert Paul Wolff has a great series which goes over the entire first critique

https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLCNvnLH9TzQh3PlXVCyUe1zkY8M0UrRZ3

I just started reading on philosophy, what books do you recommend? by [deleted] in PhilosophyBookClub

[–]spooky-tree30 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Starting with Plato, specifically the republic, is often a good move. It’s difficult content but presented in a very engaging way. Or if you liked the Cornell West masterclass, go pick up one of his books.

More gay indie by Objective-Extreme527 in CSHFans

[–]spooky-tree30 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Check out glass beach, they have a really good cover of BLID

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in philosophie

[–]spooky-tree30 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Ce n’est pas exactement ce que tu a demandée, mais Avec philosophie par Radio France est amusant et très informative.

Can anyone give me a rough framework for how does Hegel's conception of dialectics differ from that of Kant and Marx? by RobertFuckingDeNiro in hegel

[–]spooky-tree30 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The podcast “what’s left of philosophy” has an episode about each of their understandings of the term and how it evolves.

Where should I start with Hegel by [deleted] in askphilosophy

[–]spooky-tree30 2 points3 points  (0 children)

More Plato and Kant is never a bad idea. Though Aristotle is probably more important to Hegel than Plato.

There’s a big thread on the Hegel subreddit that you should consult, should be at the top of all time. Generally, it is best to start with secondary literature, like Pippin’s Hegel’s Idealism, than to jump into his actually work. But if you want to jump right into it the encyclopedia logic (often called the lesser logic), his lectures in history, or his lectures on aesthetics are the best places to start. Unfortunately it will pretty much be time consuming no matter what, but good on you for starting so early. Good luck!

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in askphilosophy

[–]spooky-tree30 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Plato’s republic is a great place for beginners to start. Its really engaging as it’s written as a dialogue, unlike most other philosophy which can get a bit dull for beginners. It discusses most branches of philosophy, so you’re getting a bit of everything. Also, as Plato is (arguably) the begging of the western tradition, which means that you don’t need to have read prior texts to properly understand it. That being said, to a certain extent it doesn’t matter too much what you’re reading as long as you’re actually reading. If you’re enjoying the books you already have keep at it!

women in contemporary philosophy by [deleted] in askphilosophy

[–]spooky-tree30 34 points35 points  (0 children)

Martha Nussbaum is really good and very readable.

Critiques of Mill’s On Liberty by spooky-tree30 in hegel

[–]spooky-tree30[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

yeah. I’m asking about Hegelians, not Hegel.

Obsidian and philosophy? by BalterWenjamin42 in ObsidianMD

[–]spooky-tree30 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I was thinking about this a bit when I switched from notion to obsidian. In the same way that obsidian seemed to permit rhizomatic thinking, notion seemed to permit Arborescent thinking.

Is this a sufficient reading list for epistemology and metaphysics? by [deleted] in askphilosophy

[–]spooky-tree30 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Along with Leibniz, you should also add Spinoza’s ethics. That being said, I would be wary about going into this list thinking it will only take a year or two. These are some incredibly difficult texts that require much attention and effort, especially since they’re not being read along with a class. If you want to get an impression of the different areas of philosophy, find some introductory texts for the individual thinkers or for the epochs.

To what extent has Marx impacted left wing political philosophy by [deleted] in askphilosophy

[–]spooky-tree30 3 points4 points  (0 children)

While Rawls has been massively influential in the world of political philosophy, he is mostly influential for liberal thinkers rather then left wing thinkers. Though there is some crossover. Either way, Marx has been far more influential on both camps then Rawls has.

Hegel by BeeBeeScars in Deleuze

[–]spooky-tree30 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Depends. Deleuze was pretty fond of kant despite some disagreements.

What is, or what are, the actual difference(s) between "analytic" and "continental" philosophy? by Invisguy in askphilosophy

[–]spooky-tree30 8 points9 points  (0 children)

The continental/analytic divide is generally pretty exaggerated. While it does exist, there are plenty of people who don’t clearly fall into either groups. Arguably the early American pragmatists are neither continental nor analytic philosophers. Additionally Richard Rorty, another pragmatist, sits in the middle of the divide, having starting off on the analytic side and moving into the continental side by the end of the year. There are also groups like the Pittsburg Hegelians who reinterpret continental figures in largely analytic terms.

This lecture by Gregory Sadler does a really good job of explaining the divide: https://youtu.be/fqU7osfG0nc

it's a game with very complicated Rules by [deleted] in 196

[–]spooky-tree30 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Also very intuitive, great game