Hey people who have been led here by Buzzfeed’s attempt to link to my ‘Awkward Young Nietzsche’ series and instead just see my other Nietzsche related posts. You can find all the pictures now in the #AwkwardYoungNietzsche tag!
The critique of the Standard Social Sciences Model that has been emerging from the cognitive and evolutionary communities is not that traditional accounts have underestimated the importance of biological factors relative to environmental factors in human life. Instead, the target is the whole framework that assumes that “biological factors” and “environmental factors” refer to mutually exclusive sets of causes that exist in some kind of explanatory zero-sum relationship, so that the more one explains “biologically” the less there is to explain “socially” or “environmentally.”
—Barkow, Cosmides, Tooby
The Pringles slogan is too true, I can’t stop eating Pringles despite being sick of them and hating it.I I bought two tubes of ‘hot&spicy flavour and one of them is still left. Pringles are the substance I am made of. Pringles are a river which sweeps me along, but I am the river; They are a tiger which destroys me, but I am the tiger; it is a fire which consumes me, but I am the fire. The world, unfortunately, is real; I, unfortunately, am eating Pringles.
It is apparently very congenial for some people who are professionally concerned with fictional texts to be told that all texts are really fictional anyway, and that claims that fiction differs significantly from science and philosophy can be deconstructed as a logocentric prejudice […] The upper limit, and I believe the reductio ad absurdum, of this “sense of mastery” conveyed by deconstruction, is in Geoffrey Hartman’s claim that the prime creative task has now passed from the literary artist to the critic.
John Searle on why English Literature departments are in love with Deconstruction.
As an English Literature graduate I sincerely hope that one day Literature departments will decide to include the study of literature in their courses, instead of simply training students to scan books for equivalences with post-structuralist theory and to come away sneering at other disciplines for not doing the same.
In my student-days, for example, I found the university philosophers very ordinary men indeed, who had collected together a few conclusions from the other sciences, and in their leisure hours read the newspapers and went to concerts; they were treated by their academic colleagues with politely veiled contempt. They had the reputation of knowing very little, but of never being at a loss for obscure expressions to conceal their ignorance. They had a preference for those obscure regions where a man could not walk long with clear vision. One said of the natural sciences, “Not one of them can fully explain to me the origin of matter; then what do I care about them all?”— Another said of history, “It tells nothing new to the man with ideas”: in fact, they always found reasons for its being more philosophical to know nothing than to learn anything. If they let themselves be drawn to learn, a secret instinct made them fly from the actual sciences and found a dim kingdom amid their gaps and uncertainties.
—Friedrich Nietzsche, Untimely Meditations