learning to be a car mechanic presumably doesnt require lots of discourse about henry ford's original design choices, so i do not understand why philosophy discourse is uh... the way it is
i agree with this, but this does not explain the orientation i see philosophy people have to discussion. like they dont talk about old philosophers the way scott does in this post.
in my view there’s four main branches of contemp phil
— analytic (logical rational bleh)
— conti (low key poetry, cool, illogical)
— history of phil (cool)
— practical/xphi (also cool)
often it’s unclear who’s doing what and hilarity frequently ensues from this misunderstanding