It feels like their method of thinking is corrupted in some deep way? It's pretty subtle, but academic philosophers seem to think in ways that lead to *less* clarity, while framing this as virtue. It feels like they're "performing thinking"; doing things that resemble thoughts.
Conversation
My less-than-charitable interpretation is they're put into a system that incentivizes for prestige and respect; to be a good philosopher is to 'look like' a good philosopher, and good philosophers have dusty tomes and refer to elaborate concepts mere mortals can't understand.
Replying to
Focus is placed on figuring out what older philosophers thought, and using complicated, inaccessible terminology. I distrust this; if your words are complicated and inaccessible, your thoughts must be an absolute mess. Clarity keeps you grounded, but alas, it's not prestigious.
8
8
116
Ofc I'm being kinda strong-language and hyperbole here, and #notallphilosophers; i know a few academic-background philosophers who seem pretty good at thinking, though *all* from that group had training or exposure to non-academic philosophy.
5
3
48
Replying to
every time ive tried to have a discussion with academic philosophers i wanna shoot myself
3
18
Show replies
Replying to
The first great Western philosopher, Socrates, was put to death.
Many of those who followed in this tradition were ridiculed if not worse.
Your opinion checks out with me. If you’re not even getting ratioed, can you really be a philosopher?
Replying to
I have been suspecting that for *some* academic philosophy, which while being the loudest on twitter and opinion pages is also kind of a minority, ie *some* of the descendant of the continental side of the analytic / continental split.
[1/2]
1
Show additional replies, including those that may contain offensive content
Show