I was reading some very low level analytical philosophy papers and it turns out human civilization is even more r-slurred than expected.

Turns out a lot of what we consider common sense today is things that were considered the cutting edge of human thought in the 1950s.

You know how its easy to figure out that just because you saw something, and are sure that what you saw makes your conclusion true, and thus is real knowledge? Well turns out nope, correlation is not causation, and the guy who explained that only managed to do so in 1950.

1950 is when we figured out that just because one thing happens right after another thing, does not guarantee that the first thing is causing the second thing. Sometimes we just get lucky.

You know the whole speech is violence and you can r*pe a woman by saying r*pe out loud? That's a misinterpretation of a paper written in 1993 that is talking about how speech itself is an action because there is an intent with which something is spoken. An argument that was once used to suggest that all porn by its very nature is the subjugation and subordination of women.

Then there is the question of moral luck, a paper by Thomas Nagel from 1979 which shows us that a big part of being a moral person is just being lucky. You never got into that accident which caused somebody to die. You never had that one bad day where that fist fight trying to defend yourself accidentally killed the person you were fighting. Philosophers previously argued that only what you cannot and can do is moral. Morality is the decisions you make, but so much of moral judgement is based on things out of your control that moral luck becomes an actual thing. That if we were to ignore moral luck, we would end up in societies that we consider undeniably immoral.

For example - letting all the weed users out of jail en masse causing an increase in other unrelated crimes.

Then there is a famous paper from I don't remember when and I don't remember by who which proves that inductive reasoning, that gut feeling works and makes perfect sense, and that someone saying they have two black balls in their drawer then pointing to a red shoe in the room to prove it makes sense, because the existence of a red shoe outside the drawer actually increases the probability of there being two black balls in the drawer even if by a minuscule amount.

Let's also not forget about the bits about how deep and complex philosophy is, and turns out it's not. That's continental philosophy, which for the majority of time has been a self masturbatory exercise where the author has been more focused on writing things that make them feel and sound smart than things that can be tested by the reader or anybody else for that matter.

Continental philosophy is the peak of conclusions a man can derive about the nature of the universe without having testable hypothesis. In my personal opinion by now it is in the same place as Alchemy as a real science.

Continental philosophy is crap. It is a bunch of guys going "what if" and "let's assume" about things then writing a whole book or five starting from there. It is an attempt at deep insight from a human perspective without the use of any measuring cowtools. It is as useful as poetry to be precise.

The last time the continental school did something useful was probably before the 1950s and its easy to tell that the continental school has reached its limits when only wannabe geniuses online would make 1 hour long videos about it, along with the fact that they are at best the backbone of real sciences, acting as the baseline which has long ago already been surpassed.

Psychoanalysis and critical theory are well and good for example, but it is real technical science and logic that builds up upon it. To find methods of proving the idea and the concepts. To take probability of events into account.

Truth is, philosophy has been failing for decades because the actual sciences made so many advances that for the philosopher to write anything useful would require them to actually be well read in advanced logic and analysis. Which is where the analytical school of philosophy was born, and over time this school has appeared to grow into something incomprehensible to the average person without a P.hd solely because the analytical philosophy school actually kept up with the sciences and the discoveries that they made.

You can also see the difference in the quality of analytical and continental philosophy in the quality of the societies that most espouse each type. The Americans are far more focused on and dedicated to analytical philosophy. They in turn have a society that continues to grow and prosper and make new discoveries, because they use logic to solve their problems and find insights into how the world works.

The European world meanwhile, has fallen far behind the Americans, because their entire philosophy and way of thinking is based off of a single individual having profound sounding insights about the world and how it functions that do not translate to actual output and solutions in the real world.

Continental philosophy is akin to the world of emotions while Analytical philosophy is akin to the world of reason, with the greatest horror of all being that the average person and the world embraces continental philosophy far more strongly than it does analytical philosophy, suggesting that people always want the r-slurred easier solutions that make them feel smart rather than the solutions that work but are beyond them. This is where the human ego clashes against human capability, and why we end up with those who revolutionize society with their discoveries becoming completely disconnected from everyday society altogether over time.

Now I wonder how analytical and continental philosophy explains the existence of the incel culture.

Conclusion:

Continental philosophy is people pretending to be smart. Analytical philosophy is people actually proving what they say. The human species is on average genuinely r-slurred and you can tell by the fact that even truths were being written down and becoming famous like some great and amazing profound truths in the 1950s and the average person still hasn't caught up to them so far.