A friend just sent me this (http://existentialcomics.com/comic/23), it's hilarious.:p
Good stuff!
Monster Manuel indeed.
Thanks. That made me laugh out loud! :D
And I actually felt sorry for Kant...
I had a buddy who went to a game convention and played in an AD&D event. The party is sent on a quest and arrives at the cave entrance. Instead of entering the cave he started a philosophical debate about the ethics and reasons behind what they were attempting to do. The other players went along with this. They spent the entire four hours or so just debating outside of the cave. They never did go in. The DM was amazed by this, or so I was told.
"RPG.net, this is relevant to your interests."
JG
Pundit's gonna love this.
Quote from: Doughdee222;741517I had a buddy who went to a game convention and played in an AD&D event. The party is sent on a quest and arrives at the cave entrance. Instead of entering the cave he started a philosophical debate about the ethics and reasons behind what they were attempting to do. The other players went along with this. They spent the entire four hours or so just debating outside of the cave. They never did go in. The DM was amazed by this, or so I was told.
This leaves me cold. I would have politely excused myself and left for greener pastures if that went on for more than 30 minutes.
Quote from: Doughdee222;741517I had a buddy who went to a game convention and played in an AD&D event. The party is sent on a quest and arrives at the cave entrance. Instead of entering the cave he started a philosophical debate about the ethics and reasons behind what they were attempting to do. The other players went along with this. They spent the entire four hours or so just debating outside of the cave. They never did go in. The DM was amazed by this, or so I was told.
Hey, whatever works! If they were all having fun, I figure I'd just lean back and let them debate ...
Quote from: RunningLaser;741565This leaves me cold. I would have politely excused myself and left for greener pastures if that went on for more than 30 minutes.
Dungeon crawling leaves me cold; a career of it's just like playing the same pinball game, hour after hour, session after session. It takes all kinds.
Now and again a session where you sit at a table in the inn discussion tactics is amusing. The GM throws something at you and you spend the night deciding what to do, and not doing anything very much.
All in character though. Quite nice.
Foucault: "I don't know why you are so certain it is they who are evil."
Kant: "BECAUSE IT SAYS SO IN THE MONSTER MANUAL!"
(It's knowledge a priori!)
I've seen it. I think its pretty spot on at showing how all the crapulent civilization-betraying philosophers of the 20th century are essentially Swine.
This comic reminds me why I avoided postmodernism in graduate school.
Quote from: RunningLaser;741565This leaves me cold. I would have politely excused myself and left for greener pastures if that went on for more than 30 minutes.
I figure about 5 minutes. If I want philosophy rants I play MtAs, lurk at RPG.NET or remember college. If want to game, I PLAY DnD, MtAw or something similar.
I know it is trying to be humorous, but at the same time I am thinking those people at the table are assholes. Seriously there is only one guy in that group that is acting like a character in a dungeon and dragon setting. The rest are just wasting time.
If most philosophy after Plato was only footnotes to what he wrote, most philosophy after Kant is either rebuttals or attempts to find loopholes to what he wrote. ;)
JG
Quote from: Marleycat;742059I figure about 5 minutes. If I want philosophy rants I play MtAs, lurk at RPG.NET or remember college. If want to game, I PLAY DnD, MtAw or something similar.
Absolutely agree, and I minored in philosophy. I don't have any desire to listen to that stuff at the game table.
Quote from: Marleycat;742059If want to game, I PLAY DnD
Quote from: BedrockBrendan;742096I don't have any desire to listen to that stuff at the game table.
Bingo. I'm there to play a game.
Quote from: Brad;742053This comic reminds me why I avoided postmodernism in graduate school.
Kant is pretty much as far away from postmodernism as one can get. He's the embodiment of 'modernism' ("Sapere aude!"). And he is, of course, the only one that actually knows how to play D&D.
The existentialists, whatever their faults, were not postmodernists either.
It pains me to see the charlatan Derrida classified as a 'philosopher'.
Poor Kant... He got killed by orcs because everyone else didn't know how to play the game.
Quote from: Akrasia;742155Kant is pretty much as far away from postmodernism as one can get. He's the embodiment of 'modernism' ("Sapere aude!"). And he is, of course, the only one that actually knows how to play D&D.
The existentialists, whatever their faults, were not postmodernists either.
It pains me to see the charlatan Derrida classified as a 'philosopher'.
I'm more riled by Satre being Chaotic Good, anyone being a hardline fan of Stalin's is Neutral at best.
The more I read these comics the more I think it pokes fun at these people. They seem to do the dumbest things ever. I read one comic that two people found a genie and they wasted their three wishes on things that can't happen. Now they are still stuck in the desert with no water.
Quote from: Akrasia;742155The existentialists, whatever their faults, were not postmodernists either.
What
To clarify, only an existentialist would eschew the postmodern label, which makes it all the more laughable as they're just Postmodern 2: Electric Boogaloo.
(and of course Kant isn't a postmodern...yeesh)
Quote from: Brad;742178What
To clarify, only an existentialist would eschew the postmodern label, which makes it all the more laughable as they're just Postmodern 2: Electric Boogaloo.
Existentialism (Kierkegaard, Dostoyevsky, Sartre, Camus, etc.)
predates Postmodernism (Baudrillard, Lyotard, Derrida, Foucault [arguably], etc.), and is distinct from it.
While existentialism (and phenomenology and pragmatism and other things)
influenced postmodernism, they are not the same thing.
Quote from: RPGPundit;742034I've seen it. I think its pretty spot on at showing how all the crapulent civilization-betraying philosophers of the 20th century are essentially Swine.
More like the other way around, right?
JG
Quote from: James Gillen;742247More like the other way around, right?
JG
All Swine are crapulent civilization-betraying philosophers?
Quote from: RPGPundit;742351All Swine are crapulent civilization-betraying philosophers?
More like "the Swine" are to gaming what deconstructionism is to philosophy.
JG
Quote from: RPGPundit;742034I've seen it. I think its pretty spot on at showing how all the crapulent civilization-betraying philosophers of the 20th century are essentially Swine.
Don't worry Pundit. Neuroscience will do to philosophy what chemistry did to alchemy. The pragmatists and logical positivists will win out in the end.
Quote from: Akrasia;742182Existentialism (Kierkegaard, Dostoyevsky, Sartre, Camus, etc.) predates Postmodernism (Baudrillard, Lyotard, Derrida, Foucault [arguably], etc.), and is distinct from it.
While existentialism (and phenomenology and pragmatism and other things) influenced postmodernism, they are not the same thing.
Sure.
Only if you're a postmodern.
Quote from: NathanIW;742533Neuroscience will do to philosophy what chemistry did to alchemy.
Doesn't neuroscience (specifically the depressing brutality of its truths) have the potential to be more destructive to the course of civilization that philosophy though?
Quote from: Shipyard Locked;742581Doesn't neuroscience (specifically the depressing brutality of its truths) have the potential to be more destructive to the course of civilization that philosophy though?
Yes. Just like chemistry can be far, far more destructive to the course of civilization than alchemy.
This comic doesn't tell us who's in charge of the sheep dip. It's rubbish Bruce.
Quote from: James Gillen;741726Foucault: "I don't know why you are so certain it is they who are evil."
Kant: "BECAUSE IT SAYS SO IN THE MONSTER MANUAL!"
(It's knowledge a priori!)
Roleplayer vs Rules lawyer....
Quote from: Brad;742579Sure.
Only if you're a postmodern.
Hrm... :pundit:
I now feel the need to clarify two things:
1. I am
not, in any shape or form, a 'postmodernist'. I am thoroughly '
modern'. My philosophical heroes include Hobbes, Hume, Rousseau, Voltaire, and Kant. (Regarding the existentialists, I find Nietzsche and Camus insightful, but don't hang out in their club house most days.)
2. You are ... somewhat clueless about the history of philosophy.
I like that your user name is Akrasia and then you responded to Brad's trolling :D
The DM didn't even let Kant roll the dice. He might have got lucky and won! That De Beauvior is a DM fiat bitch.
Quote from: James Gillen;741726Foucault: "I don't know why you are so certain it is they who are evil."
Kant: "BECAUSE IT SAYS SO IN THE MONSTER MANUAL!"
(It's knowledge a priori!)
I have to disagree here.
The DM, who decides the alignment of NPCs, is not bound by the Monster Manual. Ergo there's no reason to assume monsters are exactly as described in the Monster Manual.
Also Kant is metagaming.
Quote from: Dan Vincze;743162I have to disagree here.
The DM, who decides the alignment of NPCs, is not bound by the Monster Manual. Ergo there's no reason to assume monsters are exactly as described in the Monster Manual.
Also Kant is metagaming.
knowledge
a priori = metagaming. ;)
JG
Quote from: NathanIW;742970I like that your user name is Akrasia and then you responded to Brad's trolling :D
Ha! I choose my handle for a reason. :p
Almost all logical positivists I've ever met are people who absolutely refuse to admit they're engaging in a limited belief paradigm and aren't actually all that interested in truth.
Now there's one for the analytic philosophers:
http://existentialcomics.com/comic/28
Quote from: Akrasia;748797Now there's one for the analytic philosophers:
http://existentialcomics.com/comic/28
I laughed.
Quote from: Akrasia;7429442. You are ... somewhat clueless about the history of philosophy.
Okay, believe whatever you want.
The Wittgenstein bit particularly slayed (slew?) me.
Quote from: RPGPundit;743759Almost all logical positivists I've ever met are people who absolutely refuse to admit they're engaging in a limited belief paradigm and aren't actually all that interested in truth.
Given how concerned they are with verifiability and falsifiability, I'm guessing the truth you wish they were interested in is some sort of woo-woo magic truth or something. It's hard caring about the truth of poets, theologians and sorcerers when you're busy providing the philosophical underpinning of the type of research that made things like computers and satellites possible. For all their faults, the logical positivists (and the revision of their ideas by later pragmatists) are onto something that actually works in the real world.
I'm also suspicious that having a "limited belief paradigm" is what you call it when people refuse to believe in magic or aliens or jeebus before they have evidence of it actually existing.
EDIT: Carnap's admonition to not meta game was awesome.
Quote from: Brad;748942Okay, believe whatever you want.
...
Quote from: Brad;742178What
To clarify, only an existentialist would eschew the postmodern label, which makes it all the more laughable as they're just Postmodern 2: Electric Boogaloo.
(and of course Kant isn't a postmodern...yeesh)
Short of Heidegger tricking out a Delorean or Foucault having access to the TARDIS, this is simply not possible. So either you're suggesting that effects can follow from a future cause, or you don't know what you're talking about.
To say nothing of Kant belonging to a school of thought that didn't exist until decades after his death.
Quote from: LibraryLass;748990To say nothing of Kant belonging to a school of thought that didn't exist until decades after his death.
What
Quote from: Brad;749018What
Kant died in 1804, numbnuts. There was barely modernism yet, let alone postmodernism.
Quote from: Brad;749018What
Kant died in 1804. Modernism was not yet even a thing that existed in 1804, let alone
postmodernism. It would be like characterizing Jack Kirby as a webcomics author, or Poe as a Beat poet.
The first thing I learned after getting my degree in philosophy was that the mere mention of 'philosophy' as a discussion topic leads to the inevitable circle-jerkery that ensues especially once you go into graduate "studies" of philosophy (that are essentially pointless)
Either that... or the vast majority of people that don't actually understand philosophy don't give a fuck enough about it to care to discuss it.
These comics were...okay.
Knights of the Dinner Table - far better and ironically more philosophical.
Quote from: Brad;749018What
Indeed. :pundit:
Quote from: tenbones;749143The first thing I learned after getting my degree in philosophy was that the mere mention of 'philosophy' as a discussion topic leads to the inevitable circle-jerkery that ensues especially once you go into graduate "studies" of philosophy (that are essentially pointless)
Cool story, bro! :pundit:
"Whereof one cannot kill, therefore one must run away in silence."
Quote from: LibraryLass;749138Kant died in 1804. Modernism was not yet even a thing that existed in 1804, let alone postmodernism. It would be like characterizing Jack Kirby as a webcomics author, or Poe as a Beat poet.
And who said Kant was a postmodern..? No one in this thread.
Quote from: Brad;749296And who said Kant was a postmodern..? No one in this thread.
You.
Quote from: Brad;749296And who said Kant was a postmodern..? No one in this thread.
I'm sorry. I assumed upthread you were being sarcastic in an effort to look better-informed than Akrasia.
Quote from: LibraryLass;749416I'm sorry. I assumed upthread you were being sarcastic in an effort to look better-informed than Akrasia.
No, in fact, Kant is one of my favorite philosophers.
I think the main thing I've taken from this thread is that Continentals have a completely different view of historicity of postmodernism than the Analytics. Not to mention vastly different from Socratics.
Quote from: Brad;749456No, in fact, Kant is one of my favorite philosophers.
I think the main thing I've taken from this thread is that Continentals have a completely different view of historicity of postmodernism than the Analytics. Not to mention vastly different from Socratics.
What do you mean by "view of historicity of postmodernism"?
He probably just meant history rather than historicity. Sentence makes perfect sense once you make that change as I doubt Brad actually thinks that certain philosophers didn't exist at all.
Quote from: NathanIW;748976Given how concerned they are with verifiability and falsifiability, I'm guessing the truth you wish they were interested in is some sort of woo-woo magic truth or something.
No, what I'm saying is that logical positivists ignore all kinds of things that can't be proven through logic, and more than occasionally have made absurd leaps of faith based on something that makes sense in a closed logic-circuit but does not in fact reflect material reality.
I'm a huge fan of reason, and I don't accept anything I can logically verify as untrue, but to turn that around and suggest that the only things that are true are those that you can absolutely prove through logic is a recipe for a severely dysfunctional human being. And a severely dysfunctional society! It would discount, for example, a significant amount of modern sciences; which explains why while most scientists are generally strong advocates of the scientific method and critical thinking, very few real scientists are logical positivists these days; the latter are more often found frequenting internet forums and occasionally writing books about debunking bigfoot, about how global warming can't be absolutely proven and therefore must not exist, or about how absolutely all transcendent experiences ever must be a lie because certain verses of a particular denominational interpretation of a single religious book are logically irrational.
RPGPundit
And one for the ladies:
http://existentialcomics.com/comic/32
Quote from: LibraryLass;758270And one for the ladies:
http://existentialcomics.com/comic/32
That comic is consistently hilarious.
Quote from: LibraryLass;758270And one for the ladies:
http://existentialcomics.com/comic/32
Love it.
Looking forward to the RPGnet shitstorm about it. :D
Quote from: LibraryLass;749138Kant died in 1804. Modernism was not yet even a thing that existed in 1804, let alone postmodernism. It would be like characterizing Jack Kirby as a webcomics author, or Poe as a Beat poet.
Poe would have made an awesome beatnik.
Quote from: LibraryLass;758270And one for the ladies:
http://existentialcomics.com/comic/32
Joan of Arc playing Judith Butler would have been funnier. :D
Quote from: TristramEvans;758304Poe would have made an awesome beatnik.
He would have.