Philosophy discussion

Hello,

I've recently undertaken a study of the philosophy of language, inspired by my readings in Heidegger (the philosopher whose thought I most engage with). As thrilling as I find Heidegger, I have found his lack of a technical basis in language left room for further.

I'm curious what the most recent important works in this field have been. I've had engagements with many of the classic figures (Frege, Russel, Wittgenstein, Quine, Austin, Goodman) but am curious what is currently out there

Congratulations on your engagement. When is the happy day due?

o_0

I must admit I rarely encounter anyone advanced enough to criticize Heidegger on language. His work already suffers from major German/English translation issues, as well as issues arising from the un-translateable technical language he himself devised for his body of Thought.

Are you --rather impossibly --claiming you master all these issues enough to criticize him and yearn for better?

Has your dissatisfaction reached the point where you crave some 'more modern thinkers' who are (inconceivably) more advanced than Heidegger?

If you are a tenured professor of philology at a major European university, then I politely beg pardon for these 'leading' questions.

It's just astounding to me that any casual acquaintance of this philosopher could lead to anyone inquiring as you just have done.

After all, you must be aware that in contemporary times Philosophy is all but dead. 100% ineffectual in society. The game is over.

Have there been any 'big names' in American Thought since WWII? Is there any modern thinker (besides Chomsky, or Pinker) worth mentioning outside of dusty ivory towers?

I think you should not give up on Heidegger. If anyone ever held any answers, it would be men like he, not any contemporaneous fool.

I am working through Wittgenstein's On Certainty at the moment. Although not a polished product (he died before completion), it is certainly (word choice?) worth reading.

Feliks wrote: "Congratulations on your engagement. When is the happy day due?

o_0

I must admit I rarely encounter anyone advanced enough to criticize Heidegger on language. His work already suffers from major G..."

I propose the following "big name" in American thought since WWII: Steve Jobs. Granted, he was not an epistemological or linguistic philosopher. He was a "creative philosopher" who fundamentally improved the world.

The words I loath are those that are sanitized as a means to directly enforce carnism (the term coined by Melanie Joy and represents an invisible belief system that conditions consumers to eat, wear, and otherwise exploit certain animals). An example is "meat" which is actually the flesh of an innocent animal who wanted to live.

Another is the oxymoron of using the word "humane" to describe the deliberate killing of "livestock," who are seen as just products when in reality they are living, breathing beings just like us. There is also profound irony in the use of the word "natural" within carnism, as modern animal agriculture is one of the most "unnatural" systems on the planet.

Another huge pet peeve is when animals are used as justification terms - for example, rats are not dirty but actually very clean animals in reality, so it doesn't make sense to call someone a "rat" in a derogatory way at all. It's just plain speciesist.

Each non-human animal has their own rich life story to tell - if only we would let them! None of this is related to biological instinct, but an outdated system built upon cultural conditioning. The below link should prove informative as further understanding of this topic.

https://www.carnismdebunked.com/gloss...