What could be more satisfying in a world of moral deception than sustaining an empty brand whose original justification was correctness due to rational argument, for the manipulation of political choices about what is right? Probably nothing, and I guess that is why ‘philosophy’ (a meaningless term in an age where everything that originally constituted philosophy has now become a separate field) continues to exist as a subject at universities.
The latest delusion of grandeur among narcissistic literati (‘philosophy’ professors), that is being exploited by those in power, is that these same self-important over-educated twits who are too attached to elitism to admit that social networks, conspiracies, and science are what actually discover and create meaning, are doing ‘academic research’ about the ‘philosophy’ of Karl Marx and ‘the’ Buddha and that it constitutes valuable information. It gets even funnier as they try to pretend that the information is neither religion, nor speculation. Unfortunately for them, Marx, Buddhism and anything that is primarily housed in a philosophy department are all intellectually garbage and everyone knows it. But the great thing about ‘philosophy’ is that it is especially useful for brainwashing because, due to its branding over past centuries, people are less inclined to think it can be useful in that way. That philosophy was a means out of brainwashing may have been true a couple hundred years ago but since the advent of natural and social sciences, as well as methodology and the gradual rounding out of law (that is still incomplete) as an applied field of social reasoning, ‘philosophy’ no longer exists in the same way and increasingly seems to be little more than sophisticated fraud for political use.
A case in point is the current attempt to call studies on Marx and Buddha important, and probative of a rationally defensible truth by labeling it as ‘philosophy’. But worse is that what is called philosophy is not even the manipulation of logical parameters with words, reflexivity and valuable speculation anymore. At least that could be informative by allowing people to find potential problems with the foundations of belief systems that are built on sophisticated reasoning, even if it does nothing to improve them in the end. Or it might actually permit the possibility of radical change to exist by addressing areas of experience that politics and technology hasn’t successfully claimed to disprove yet. Instead, we have a group of overblown social scientists, logicians, or historians of ideas who are now making students get validated as having done ‘philosophy’ by matching the labels ‘Marx’ and ‘Buddha’ to versions of material realism that are capitalist friendly and anti-revolution. This is the latest example of appropriating university as a sophisticated form of quasi-religious brainwashing for political ends. What is most exasperating about it is that it is by pretending to be expressly against brainwashing that they are most successful in brainwashing students and society in general.
In fact, other than a sophisticated form of social control, ‘philosophy’ is now an empty term that constantly borrows real thinking from other disciplines and claims to somehow know better. It is a great deception that is trying to have one last hurrah before eventually being wound down. Most people already know that engineering, sciences, and legitimate humanities are real versions of what philosophy originally was before becoming all of the above. And all the attempts at keeping it alive have in fact deprived it of the intellectual rigor found in other disciplines (ie. postmodernism taking the form of watered down film theory and feminism, history as central but without the rigor of actual history, ethics as rehashed distributive justice and applied utilitarianism). The only part of philosophy left that isn’t completely subsumed by other disciplines is ‘history & philosophy of science’ which is really just adjudicative methodology…in other words, law. I’m not saying it’s not worth focusing on it outside of law but let’s not get deluded here. It is and only ever was law. The history of science and the sociology of knowledge can be helpful additions. Philosophy of science is primarily mathematics dealing with schemes of probability…in other words its mostly statistics. Kind of like something we might have heard elsewhere such as ‘standard of proof’. Obviously it gets very complicated and is not accessible to most people, to most intellectuals, or to most lawyers. However, it is not unique to (or even central to) today’s ‘philosophy’ and it is no more accessible to those who are still claiming to define themselves as professional ‘philosophers’ than anyone else. As would be expected it is dominated by the autistic and those whose specialties revolve around math. It’s valuable but it is also almost impossible to have checks and balances about it outside of the community of mathematicians, or lawyers who would make the time if paid, to subject it to its own scrutiny…as legal methodology in court. So while there are things that may seem ‘philosophical’ in various academic and professional fields, don’t let the latest version of the Ivory Tower Fraudster fool you: there’s no such thing today as philosophy. In fact, ‘philosophy’ profs are so pathetic that some are now attempting to cling to a position of power (what really matters to them) by claiming that they are actually doing science…LOL. No dice, Socrates. The closest they do to science is to examine how science as method and culture evolves and hopefully improves over time. They do some important work that actually allows for someone to get heard when demonstrating that medicine is largely political bullshit or that scientific facts are contentious decisions within the limits of logic and epistemology. But unfortunately for them, that stuff has been going on for a while outside of philosophy departments. It has been part of social sciences for a long time and has been addressed by various non-philosophers including some scientists themselves. In the end, like everything that marries reason to evidence in real life, it’s just law.
And that means that whenever any academic tries to sell something they have to go through an adjudicative process with transparency that would likely end up being most thoroughly done by lawyers. I’m not saying lawyers should be in charge of controlling information and belief systems but no one, especially so-called ‘philosophers’, should try to pretend that their ideas, research and claims are anything more than a power struggle determined according to some kind of adjudication. Might does make right for that very reason. It’s the saddest part of our society but if you don’t admit it you might as well start huffing glue.
Because even if academia, and ‘philosophy’ in particular, is total bullshit, you still need your wits about you to get your version of right imposed as much as possible through different kinds of adjudicative processes. So, much as the best lawyers are never the ones who tried to think with a sense of honesty, the most successful players at the rotten game we call life are still going to be those who can learn to get comfortable working adjudication to death so that they get their choice of truth imposed.
Not that there is necessarily only subjective truth but objective truth is not something that can ever be a genuine part of human life until we evolve far beyond our current situation. At least I admit it instead of pissing on any hope of ever getting there by perverting it into a weapon of deceit that I actually end up believing because I am so narcissistic that I’d rather kill real change than kill in pursuit of change (ie I don’t lie about fascism, caste-ism, or human suffering. The other posts will give more indication of what I mean).
In a more perfect world: philosophers talk about it, artists do it, gnostics live it, mystics become it. In the present world: legit thinkers and researchers talk about it, artists stimulate it, technologists do some of it, lawyers and economists manage its social implementation…while ‘philosophers’, wittingly or unwittingly, degrade themselves and the process of human consciousness.
Sometimes they try to sell themselves as a department that can produce graduates with “amazing writing skills”…if that’s what is being sought after I think a literature/English/journalism department will have the upper hand, idiots.
Philosophy is over and good riddance. If you see that bullshit label you can be pretty sure there’s actually something deceitful going on and it probably involves diminishing the strength of metaphysical idealism in order to manipulate students into ultimately advancing western imperialist agendas while often pretending to do the opposite. It’s the new sociology of past decades.