• Norin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    112
    ·
    19 hours ago

    It’s probably better to read the philosophers Uncle Ted was pulling from (and ultimately failed to understand).

    Ellul especially.

    • dgdft@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      26
      ·
      19 hours ago

      Might be a matter of taste, but ISAIF is worth a read on the basis of its wild mix of sociological brilliance and unhingedness IMO. That’s not to say I endorse blowing people up in the slightest, but the work stands taller than the sum of its influences.

      E.g. I think he synthesized and added to quite a few different authors in presenting his concept of oversocialization. (Please do correct me if I’m off-base — I love philosophy but it’s not my main wheelhouse).

          • three@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            edit-2
            17 hours ago

            You enjoy doing extra work? Why not explain the gibberish acronym in the first comment?

            Oh! I’m soooo sorry! I thought everyone wrote their dissertation on Ted “My First Love” Kaczynski?

            Listen to yourself, you sound ridiculous.

            • dgdft@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              27
              ·
              edit-2
              13 hours ago

              It’s just off-the-cuff writing without copyediting. Tad sloppy, but weird hate, homie.

              E: To squarely address my view of Teddy K, he’s in the same bucket as Karl Marx, Otto Von Bismarck, Rasputin, etc. Not someone whose core values I share, or think is a good person — but a historically interesting character who has cultural symbolic importance for the role they played in their respective time and place.

      • Norin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        12 hours ago

        Ted misses a lot in Jacques Ellul’s The Technological Society, which is where I’d start off f your looking for philosophers critical of modern technology.

        If you’re curious on that particular subject, I’d also recommend Lewis Mumford’s Myth of the Machine or The City in History.

        Or, for something that’s less of a tome (both Ellul and Mumford can be overly wordy), Ivan Illich’s Tools for Conviviality is incredibly critical of the modern world, but also offers hope that isn’t based on mailing bombs to universities.

        • ggtdbz@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          10 hours ago

          Huh. I picked that up from a used book stand on a whim just based on the tile and skimming it, like ten years ago. I should probably read it.