I find the entire exercise of "discovery" in metaphysics suspect, as opposed to a practical exercise in the construction of models.
It just seems to me that the general premise is that of "well, the world could not be thought of any other way, therefore it must be so", the house of cards which of course would fall apart the instant another another way is found (and there are). It's "truth finding via paucity of intuition and imagination", a sort of a "sonar upon existence based upon which kinds of noises you couldn't make".
Another aspect of run-of-mill "philosophical debates" that I highly object to is the whole trench-warfare / barricade-warfare look of them. You take a shot, and then get a "well if you don't read this whole thingamabob work I'm not gonna talk with you" BS of "academic philosophy".
People can use an author or even an entire camp as a shield, instead of doing point-by-point, person-to-person as in you know, a normal conversation?
1. Erect some barracades with a library of required works 2. Dig some trenches of old n' tired "positions" and hide inside bunkers contructed with impenetrable philosobable specific to them 3. Hunker down and be safe from any and all criticism
Instead of that, if it's just two people sitting face to face at a table you bet things would be settled in a hurry (or at least one heck of a lot less time spent in those wasting pits)
But in my case, I'd actually like to engage with the academic philosophy in order to understand it, incorporate it into research, make a critique or contribution....
Comments 15
I find the entire exercise of "discovery" in metaphysics suspect, as opposed to a practical exercise in the construction of models.
It just seems to me that the general premise is that of "well, the world could not be thought of any other way, therefore it must be so", the house of cards which of course would fall apart the instant another another way is found (and there are). It's "truth finding via paucity of intuition and imagination", a sort of a "sonar upon existence based upon which kinds of noises you couldn't make".
Well, anyways, go ahead.
Reply
Reply
People can use an author or even an entire camp as a shield, instead of doing point-by-point, person-to-person as in you know, a normal conversation?
1. Erect some barracades with a library of required works
2. Dig some trenches of old n' tired "positions" and hide inside bunkers contructed with impenetrable philosobable specific to them
3. Hunker down and be safe from any and all criticism
Instead of that, if it's just two people sitting face to face at a table you bet things would be settled in a hurry (or at least one heck of a lot less time spent in those wasting pits)
Reply
But in my case, I'd actually like to engage with the academic philosophy in order to understand it, incorporate it into research, make a critique or contribution....
I'm an academic now, you see.
Reply
Leave a comment