Timeline for How does philosophy advance despite irreconcilable background assumptions ("positions") on every topic?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
14 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 10, 2018 at 13:28 | comment | added | user20253 | Okay. But 'not concluding' is not 'postmodernism'. I'm struggling to grasp why I'm having to defend science when it is not the topic. | |
| Aug 10, 2018 at 0:14 | comment | added | CriglCragl | @PeterJ "Science never 'concludes' either." | |
| Aug 9, 2018 at 15:03 | comment | added | user20253 | I fear you have misread me but cannot see how. Where did I suggest this? I have not mentioned science. I'm arguing against your postmodern approach to truth, not for it. | |
| Aug 9, 2018 at 14:12 | comment | added | CriglCragl | @PeterJ Science is postmodernist now? Weird definition. | |
| Aug 9, 2018 at 11:21 | comment | added | user20253 | Each to their own but I don't subscribe to the view that truth is tentative, contextual or dependent on assumptions. If I did I would have to give up philosophy as a waste of time. Fortunately I see no reason to hold this postmodernist view of truth and analysis does not force it on us. | |
| Aug 8, 2018 at 12:37 | comment | added | CriglCragl | @PeterJ Is science an endless talking shop? Recognising that truth is tentative, contextual, and depends on assumptions that should be explicit and open to question, is not the end of truth but the only way to build it on firm foundations. Sprinkling mathematical fairy dust of proofs & certainty only distracts from the core business of how we and the world relate. | |
| Aug 8, 2018 at 11:24 | comment | added | user20253 | I'd rather reach definite conclusions. It baffles me why so many people are happy to allow philosophy to be an interminable talking shop. Some even argue that inconclusiveness is its strength, as this answer seems to do. Yet the idea that philosophy is inconclusive is a theory, not a provable conclusion, and is peculiar to a particular tradition. It is not necessary to endorse it. | |
| Aug 6, 2018 at 13:09 | comment | added | CriglCragl | We can try using things like rationalwiki.org/wiki/Rapoport%27s_Rules And try to remain open and curious ourselves, and value win-win debates rather than valueing 'victory' in conflicts of ideas.. How to have good productive discussions is an interesting topic | |
| Aug 2, 2018 at 16:06 | comment | added | Yechiam Weiss | In conclusion, I'd be happy to see philosophy (or more precisely, philosophers) work the way you present, but I just fail to see it way many times, and much more in the way I present. | |
| Aug 2, 2018 at 16:05 | comment | added | Yechiam Weiss | And this creates a situation where one philosopher takes stand in one side of the debate, and another in a different side. From here, these two philosophers can't actually talk, and continue this debate in a healthy way, because they've taken a stance that they won't really budge from, bringing forth a situation Buber called the "I-it" relationship. This is the kind of discussions I see being made by a lot of philosophers that I object to, and I present in this answer. I ask - how can we continue from reaching such standpoint? | |
| Aug 2, 2018 at 16:04 | comment | added | Yechiam Weiss | I might be able to emphasis where I'm coming from, using your example of the theological debate. Sure, one may state that the theological debate is endless without any hope (nor should it have, according to this view) to reach a final answer to one of the most famous questions throughout history "is there a God?". But contra to this view, many will and does ask for a definite answer, and (some) philosophers do try to answer it, and bring a conclusion that they consider to be the truth. | |
| Aug 1, 2018 at 18:42 | comment | added | Geoffrey Thomas♦ | Edit : 'would' replaces 'woukd' : 'k' and 'l' - letters next to each other on the keyboard. Btw : +1 for answer. | |
| Aug 1, 2018 at 18:40 | history | edited | Geoffrey Thomas♦ | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
'would' replaces 'woukd'
|
| Aug 1, 2018 at 17:23 | history | answered | CriglCragl | CC BY-SA 4.0 |