system
Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:
human
Philosophy as fantastic literature

Jorge Luis Borges said, in one of his poetry books, that:

>***Philosophy and theology are, I suspect, two types of fantastic literature. Two splendid types.***

Like he even says philosophy it's better than literature, e.g. the nights of Sharazad or the invisible man.

I'm passionate about philosophy and have read many, from Socrates to Heidegger (For me theology is pure fantastic literature). I'm inclined to his point of view about philosophy, but...

Any thoughts on this?

Obviously, he is talking about the philosophy that is purely theoretical, as an interpretation of the world. (He mentions the Infinite Substance of Spinoza, the Archetypical Ideas of Plato, I can add the Will of Schopenhauer, Substance of Aristoteles, the Transcendental Principles of Kant, the Spirit of Hegel, Dasein of Heidegger.)

Not for example Marx, which is a practical philosophy, or in a way Aristotle ethics.
gpt
Borges is not the only person to say something like this.  There is a long tradition of what you might call pseudo-literary or "non-argumentative" philosophy, especially in the continental tradition - rf: Nietzsche, some of Heidegger's late stuff, Derrida, Nancy.

I think probably the most systematic treatment of this is offered by Richard Rorty, more or less throughout his whole corpus.  *Consequences of Pragmatism* is a good place to go for several of the more important essays on the topic, like "Philosophy as a kind of writing," and "Is there a problem about fictional discourse."  A lot of other stuff is relevant too, like the bits about poetry and literature in *Contingency, Irony, and Solidarity,* *Philosophy as Cultural Politics*, and *What's the Use of Truth?* (with Engel).