Re: does capitalism like philosophy?

On Jul 2, 1:42 pm, sirbl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 wrote:
> On 2 jul, 13:22, Leon Hoeneveld <leonh...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Paul Grieg schreef:
>
> > > On Jul 2, 8:17 am, sirbl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 wrote:
> > >> or does it only like economics? cuz under capitalism only thing
> > >> philosophy departments seem to do is disappear.
>
> > > If there's a market for philosophy then capitalism can be said to
like
> > > it. If philosophy departments are disappearing (where's your
evidence
> > > for that?) then it is because the customers are not there.
> > > Professional academic philosophers are competing in an equal
> > > marketplace for students, and if they cannot attract as many
students
> > > as (say) media studies departments then the failure is theirs, and
> > > they should be cast out to do philosophy on the dole (it might
> > > actually do the some good!)
>
> > > Read Bryan Magee's "Confessions" and you can see why Oxbridge
> > > universities philosophy departments failed to attract students in
the
> > > past few decades, and deserved to die. I for one (intensely
motivated
> > > to study *real* philosophy) decided to pursue physics & maths rather
> > > than get involved with 'classics wonks' who wouldn't know a quark
from
> > > their backside and were only interested in trivial linguistic
> > > flapdoodle.
>
> > TLF doesn't have anything to do with Wittgenstein's Tractatus Logicus
> > Philosophicus, has it?
>
> > Because then it should have been: tivial linguistic phlapdoodle.
>
> what's witt's equivalent in the physics department?

Later or earlier Witt? If later Witt, then any string theorists, i.e.
any physicists who gets so far from reality no one can distinguish
their work from flapdoodle.