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.
5
4
84
Replying to
every time ive tried to have a discussion with academic philosophers i wanna shoot myself
Show replies
Surely the more likely explanation is that you didn’t understand them rather than that you were able to diagnose that they were systematically corrupted and “performing thoughts”
1
try him:
Quote Tweet
Replying to @cbrandolino and @Aella_Girl
... on the other hand, there's a huge number of academic philosophers that thrive through clarity of expression and argument.
Example:
Michael Huemer: fakenous.net - his are some of the clearest and compelling anti-utilitarian arguments I heard, as a utilitarian.
1