is it all built upon the worship of materialism and hatred for anything metaphysical or i just misunderstood it?

>>24512006 (OP)
It boggles my mind that people still think "analytic philosophy" ended with logical positivism. You realize people continue to do analytic philosophy today, and metaphysics is a major field with tons of papers being published in leading journals constantly, right? Do the slightest bit of googling.

>>24512160
No relevamt philosopher publishes in papers. Real philosophers of impact publish books.

>>24512170
Maybe if by "relevant" you mean "known to illiterate retards incapable of googling" like yourself. And since the question was about analytic philosophy specifically, yes, the vast majority of influential work in the field comes from papers published in journals. But I'm sure you think philosophy operates as a conversation among a handful great men because you care more about big names than the actual ideas discussed.

>>24512160
my bad

>>24512006 (OP)
>thoughts on Analytical philoso(...)

It‘s gay

>>24512006 (OP)
Analytical thomism is a thing and it's pretty fertile, check G. E. M. Anscombe and Alasdair MacIntyre.

>>24512006 (OP)
Alright op, Jungians generally classify Nietzsche and Marx as INTJ. They can't ever seem to agree on Hegel, E or I then alphabet soup. So what sort of agreement are you looking for?

>>24512195
>But I'm sure you think philosophy operates as a conversation among a handful great men
100%

So you're a scientist, doing science stuff. Interesting. I like formal epistemology too.

>>24512160
yeah and they "solved" problems like
- do other worlds exist where a chair is slightly different
- do you know something if you don't have justified belief
- trolley problems
Philosophy is just word games now and Wittgenstein killed it.

>>24512195
>Maybe if by "relevant" you mean "known to illiterate retards incapable of googling" like yourself.
Yes. Semi-Unironically. That is what philosophy means. Except youre being a bit obtuse.

Philosophers like Schopenhaeur and Nietzsche didnt really take off until late in their life or after their death.

Its less about writing for normies. And more about writing for yourself. Not writing for academia. Just pure expression of the unique mind and personality that produces a philosophy that cannot simply be taught.

Thats the problem with all modern philosophy and why its irrelevant. Its concerned with how to think about things. Not a creation and searching for what values are.

>>24512403
100%

Analytical philosophy will be totally debased by neural philosophy (or whatever they will call it). There will be some resistance, and even some pride, however ultimately the machines will be able to wrangle mathematics absolutely nobody is able to understand. By then, intuiting (both ways) will be a more important "skill".

>>24512425
I used to be a very analytical leaning guy, until I suddenly became disillusioned with modernity and the fact that despite trying to learn psychology and sociology in school. I was taught more about "neurotransmitters" and how to read and interpret sociological studies, than anything actually about the human mind, behaviour, and/or social groups, and social formulations. (Not that i literally didnt learn anything its just that the "science" aspect of everything is just so emphasized and it feels like im not learning anything, just being taught things to memorize and regurgitate, not engage with).

And some other things. But yeah I used to be a very science science science logic guy, and to some degree, still am. But this is why I am much more skeptical and critical of analytical philosophy now