Who are your favourite philosophers?

[version]

I've only read Baudrillard so I guess I'll have to say Baudrillard.

 

[linebaugh]

I've only read Baudrillard

Says the liar

 

[luka]

Nietzsche. That's the only one I understand a bit of.

 

[version]

Says the liar

Well, he's the only one I've actually read a book by from cover to cover. I've read bits and pieces of others.

 

[luka]

I generally feel hostile to philosophy but it also troubles me. I can't understand it but I feel I should be able to. Mathematics I can't understand but I don't care. Not being able to understand philosophy creates a definite insecurity.

 

[version]

Do you think they always want to be understood?

 

[luka]

yes, though not necessarily by everyone.

 

[version]

The language is much more difficult than the ideas.

 

[luka]

yeah. i don't know why they do that. we don't do that.

 

[luka]

well, constant escape does but we'll soon beat it out of him.

 

[linebaugh]

I feel if Baudrillard is considered a philosopher then guys like Mark Fisher can aswell, though Ive only read Baudrillards Spirit of Terrorism essay. I'm a little over halfway through Discipline and Punish and I think the same can be said with regards to Foucault.
I give a little leeway to the complex language for newer guys, but have trouble being patient with the older guys because they all have the god problem- looming behind all their thought is that belief in God that makes it harder to trust why they feel the need to be so obtuse

 

[luka]

some old guys are lucid and witty eg Kierkegard

 

[luka]

discipline and punish is lucid and entertaining

 

[version]

What could Baudrillard be considered other than a philosopher?

 

[linebaugh]

What could Baudrillard be considered other than a philosopher?

'social theorist,' which I think is the same thing. Does Baudrillard do metaphysical speculation?

 

[luka]

inb4 a twat etc.

😂

there's a baudrillard thread i like. Mr Tea, bless him, is being really, really annoying

 

[dilbert1]

contemporary: raymond geuss, giorgio agamben, irami osei-frimpong, adam kotsko (~political theology)
dead: nietzsche, foucault (esp. mid-to-late), fanon, walter benjamin, glissant, debord, hannah arendt (tho pretty hit and miss imo)
honorable mention/somewhat guilty pleasure: tiqqun (esp. theory of bloom, intro to civil war, this is not a program)

 

[version]

Tea's dream's to tie Baudrillard's skeleton to a chair and play outrageously loud slap bass at it until it disintegrates.

 

[version]

there's a baudrillard thread i like. Mr Tea, bless him, is being really, really annoying

Great title.

Jean Baudrillard Did Not Die

Rest in Peace http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean_Baudrillard http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/6425389.stm

dissensus.com

 

[constant escape]

Michel Serres looks very promising, but I haven't touched his work yet. He seems to have a radically different approach to things - different even from the post-structural milieu, which is already vast and unplaceable. One Serres-stricken scholar said he was appealing because he smiled.

Francois Laruelle is some of the densest stuff I've seen, but his "non-standard philosophy", from my keyhole view, seems to address major issues concerning the almost undetectably massive momentum of the philosophic orthodoxy. That is, "the principle of sufficient philosophy", which seems to be the tendency to securely posit one conclusion in order to move to the next, when perhaps the first isn't worth irreversibly positing. Ray Brassier seems to champion Laruelle, and the Brassier/Harmon/etc crowd (around speculative realism and object oriented ontology) is a domain I have yet to gain access to.

Henri Lefebvre looks interesting too. Know next to nothing about him though, other than Rhythmanalysis sounds cool.

I admit I traffick heavily through the frenchies and their verbosity. Check out Laruelle.