82
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 21 Jun 2023
82 points (87.3% liked)
GenZedong
4544 readers
36 users here now
This is a Dengist community in favor of Bashar al-Assad with no information that can lead to the arrest of Hillary Clinton, our fellow liberal and queen. This community is not ironic. We are Marxists-Leninists.
This community is for posts about Marxism and geopolitics (including shitposts to some extent). Serious posts can be posted here or in /c/GenZhou. Reactionary or ultra-leftist cringe posts belong in /c/shitreactionariessay or /c/shitultrassay respectively.
We have a Matrix homeserver and a Matrix space. See this thread for more information. If you believe the server may be down, check the status on status.elara.ws.
Rules:
- No bigotry, anti-communism, pro-imperialism or ultra-leftism (anti-AES)
- We support indigenous liberation as the primary contradiction in settler colonies like the US, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Israel
- If you post an archived link (excluding archive.org), include the URL of the original article as well
- Unless it's an obvious shitpost, include relevant sources
- For articles behind paywalls, try to include the text in the post
- Mark all posts containing NSFW images as NSFW (including things like Nazi imagery)
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
Philosophy has a tendency to need to use very specialized language to avoid problems of ambiguity and to precisely identify concepts that have no reason to come up in the vast, vast majority of conversation among laypeople.
I mean, yes and no. You go to Aristotle, for instance, and while his work is definitely not easy to understand -- it being lecture notes and all -- it's surprising how little jargon he uses, with most of it being just common words used in a restricted sense, e.g., "matter" or "relation."
Aristotle had the benefit of not having millennia of literature to be working in relation with, and himself is quite responsible for the promotion of metaphysics as a philosophical field, which is perhaps the most obscure branch of philosophy.
Yeah, but seriously what's even the point of such wisdom, especially when it can led people into things like subjective idealism. Or maybe it's because idealists needs to reach insane levels of abstraction to even explain their idiotic ideas.
Probably a certain amount of specialized terminology is neccesary, and the complete lack of it, as in (say) Nietzsche, doesn't always signify a profound thinker. But I agree with you that most contemporary philosophers use jargon simply to obscure.
I mean, from what i see Nietzsche key to popularity was precisely the fact he's understandable, because he mostly just rambled, but laymen at least can tell what he meant.