Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 10, 2017 18:01:01 GMT
Wiki lists these as the most significant which will eventually be picked up by the google algorithm if you search for continentalist literature:
A Cyborg Manifesto
After Theory
A Theory of Feelings
A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia
Anti-Oedipus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia
Being and Event
Being and Nothingness
Being and Time
Blindness and Insight
Dialectic of Enlightenment
Difference and Repetition
Du mode d'existence des objets techniques
Eclipse of Reason
Escape from Freedom
Eros and Civilization
Finite Being and Eternal Being
Gender Trouble
Madness and Civilization
Minima Moralia
Mythologies
Negative Dialectics
History and Class Consciousness
Homo Sacer
I and Thou
Ideology and Ideological State Apparatuses
Illuminations
Logical Investigations
One-Dimensional Man
Oneself as Another
Of Grammatology
Prison Notebooks
Phenomenology of Perception
The Phenomenology of Spirit
Philosophy of Symbolic Forms
Reading Capital
Simulacra and Simulation
Society of the Spectacle
Technics and Time
The History of Sexuality
The Human Condition
The Myth of Sisyphus
The Order of Things
The Poetics of Space
The Postmodern Condition
The Second Sex
The Third Body
Time and Narrative
Totality and Infinity
Truth and Method
Writing and Difference
How many have you read of this wide selection? Any particular favourites or criticism of it in general. Or any you think should belong there?
|
|
The Lost One
Junior Member
@lostkiera
Posts: 2,695
Likes: 1,331
|
Post by The Lost One on Jun 12, 2017 11:08:44 GMT
I don't reckon much to the Myth of Sisyphus to be honest. The idea of life being absurd is a pretty convincing one, but it's one Camus pretty much lifts from Kierkegaard. His own spin on it was to say we must embrace the absurd rather than try to escape it. But if life is absurd, embracing it is no more valid than rejecting it in my opinion. Camus accepts the is-ought problem but then fails to see the inconsistency in saying we "ought" to embrace the absurdity it leads to.
Speaking of Kierkegaard, he seems conspicuous by his absence on this list. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 13, 2017 22:29:50 GMT
I don't reckon much to the Myth of Sisyphus to be honest. The idea of life being absurd is a pretty convincing one, but it's one Camus pretty much lifts from Kierkegaard. His own spin on it was to say we must embrace the absurd rather than try to escape it. But if life is absurd, embracing it is no more valid than rejecting it in my opinion. Camus accepts the is-ought problem but then fails to see the inconsistency in saying we "ought" to embrace the absurdity it leads to.
Speaking of Kierkegaard, he seems conspicuous by his absence on this list. I suppose anyone could edit it to add some. It's probably more of an original contribution that enough editors agreed with since it lacks a footnote. Nietzsche is also absent so they were probably keeping it to 20th century writers (excluding Hegel). Immanence seems to be another major theme of Continentalist work. I haven't actually read The Myth of Sisyphus ( i have the unread pdf on my laptop and tablet) So looking back over the synopsis: the solution to suicide is finding meaning in being itself (the task itself is repeated forever). While I've not read Sisyphus, this is also fairly close of Nietzsche's naturalism. Nietzsche found his solution in eternal return which he saw as the ultimate affirmation of life though that itself invoked science since it was inspired by the first law of thermodynamics. |
|
The Lost One
Junior Member
@lostkiera
Posts: 2,695
Likes: 1,331
|
Post by The Lost One on Jun 14, 2017 11:45:54 GMT
so they were probably keeping it to 20th century writers (excluding Hegel). Yeah, I was assuming that as well until I saw Hegel there. I guess continentalism has always been vague defined - it always struck me as a dismissive term used by the self proclaimed "analytic" philosophers rather than a meaningful category. My problem with Camus is why he sees suicide as something that needs to be solved in the first place. His idea of suicide as some sort of failure at life is an oddly teleological view for a supposedly absurd world. Kierkegaard gets round the problem by championing faith that there is a goal which will be revealed at death meaning the faith itself becomes a goal during life. But Camus refuses to take this path (indeed he considers faith as big a failure as suicide). My knowledge of Nietzsche is limited but I think both he and Camus saw nihilism as an erosive force on the world that needed to be overcome. Kierkegaard seems to focus more on the individual - the danger of nihilism is not that it would ruin the world but the despair it invokes in the individual. Probably why he had no problem with faith where Camus did. As long as faith lets the individual overcome despair then the job is done as far as Kierkegaard is concerned. Camus on the other hand would probably see a world of blind faithful as repellent as world of nihilists. But to argue either world should be avoided just strikes me as at odds with the concept of the absurd. But I'm no expert on any of these figures so I could have them all wrong! |
|
