Take the 2-minute tour ×
Philosophy Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for those interested in logical reasoning. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Can there be a clear answer to a specific philosophical question that most people who understand the question can agree on without diverging into many competing -isms or schools of thought? Maybe instead of looking for THE right answer one could look for very useful and relevant answers.

share|improve this question
    
Yes and No. Yes because people of the same "level" tend to converge to particular set of ideas. No because there are rarely two people of EXACT same level, so they will always have slight difference in perspective. But in principle its possible. –  Asphir Dom Apr 16 at 12:29

2 Answers 2

up vote 5 down vote accepted

Maybe instead of looking for THE right answer one could look for very useful and relevent answers.

This was the attitude adopted by the American pragmatists. John Dewey, in Experience and Nature, called this expectation of a singular answer to philosophical questions, and the subsequent search for a grand unifying theory of everything The Philosophical Fallacy.

If one embraces this as a genuine problem, it does not mean that one should reject all the different schools and their -isms. One can simply be a pluralist and say that each speaks to some truth, and perhaps each -ism can speak to some truths that other -isms might not be able to. Dewey speaks about Romanticism in this regard and says that it says (true) things that other philosophies cannot, even though it is otherwise quite objectionable (he is actually quite harsh about it).

So, looking for useful answers does not necessarily mean rejecting -isms, but regarding them as valuable but limited.

share|improve this answer
    
Beatiful source; thanks for this refernce. This is exactly the "attitude" I agree with. Philosophy supply us with insight, criticism, elucidations ... but (I think) no "ultimate" solutions to problems. –  Mauro ALLEGRANZA Apr 26 at 15:45

Can there be a clear answer to a specific philosophical question that most people who understand the question can agree on without diverging into many competing -isms or schools of thought?

Yes, it appears so, assuming that one specific philosophical question will suffice.

I very recently came across Chisholm's Paradox:

It is now virtually universally acknowledged that Chisholm was right: the sort of conditional deontic claim expressed in (3) can't be faithfully represented in SDL, nor more generally by a composite of some sort of unary deontic operator and a material conditional. This is one of the few areas where there is nearly universal agreement in deontic logic. [My bold.]

Of course, it then goes on:

Whether or not this is because some special primitive dyadic deontic conditional is operating or because it is just that some non-material conditional is essential to understanding important deontic reasoning is still a hotly contested open question.

:)

share|improve this answer
    
Could Philosophy be considered the 'science' of endless debates. Maybe if someone ever resolves something in philosophy it is 'labelled' a paradox because no one is ever supposed to resolve anything. This is like the joke with two lawyers ; the younger one says 'I closed that big case we were working on'. The other Lawyer ,angry says 'You "stupido" we could have been working on that case for years and years!..' –  user128932 Oct 6 at 6:59

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.