6

Several thoughts on this (1) It would help a lot if "relation" were defined more clearly. Do you mean "share similar ideas"? Do you mean that one learned from the other? Do you mean they organize the world similarly? (2) "Post-modernism" is a pretty nebulous term that refers to a lot of different things, so there's a little bit of something for everyone in ...


4

You're right -- his work is difficult to read. And it's not your fault. He doesn't write very clearly; it might be said that he also didn't think very clearly. However, he had some interesting ideas. If you want a quick summary, start with this awesome video: youtube.com/watch?v=BBJTeNTZtGU. Basically, Foucault wanted to challenge the holders of power in ...


4

I'd suggest that one needs to distinguish between Aristotelianism and Aristotle; I find it quite difficult to conceive of how, for example, modern physics would have begun with Galileo without the work done by thinkers in Greek Antiquity, summarised in both Aristotle's Physics and Metaphysics, say; and illustrated quite directly by the drawing by Da Vinci, ...


3

I believe it has been said that "all (Western) philosophy is refutations of Plato" --one might similarly say that all Western science is refutations of Aristotle. He wrote so widely, so systematically, and so influentially, that practically every scientific discipline has a Aristotelian and a post-Aristotelian version. In a certain sense, the "overturning" ...


2

I notice that Asian here seemingly refers merely to Buddhism and Taoism. Interestingly, Buddhism emerged in India, and in India there is a whole philosophical system in place, with 6 main schools, termed DARSHANAS. The most popular one among them is VEDANTA, in which the Advaita Vedanta school, codified and given its current form by Sankara (8th century), ...


2

At least with respect to the technological distractions you mentioned, there are numerous philosophers who have argued that, indeed, it is a damaging influence. Consider Heidegger -- the essence of technology is a way of being that alienates us from the essence Being, prevents us from entering into a free relationship to it, on account of enframing, ...


2

“The Enlightenment Project” is a phrase used mostly by its critics—or rather the critics of an idea which they make into a phrase to criticize. To the extent that it means the triumph of ideals expressed by those retrospectively called “enlightenment” figures, like privileging human reason and inquiry over divine revelation and scriptural authority, their ...


1

To anyone still interested in this, I'd say Conifold's extract from the SEP and Dyske's essay are great starts, but I've found the clearest exposition to be in Luc Ferry's Political Philosophy (Volume 1). There he compares natural right (ideal) to positive right (real). He explains that Strauss was against the Enlightenment philosophy which led to modernity....


1

It's been a while since I read Strauss, but think the upshot is that, for Strauss, a 'Natural Right' is something that is (err...) naturally right. To give a trivial example, Strauss would likely say that preserving life is naturally right. People everywhere reject death in all its forms, and consider those who embrace death as pathological beings subject to ...


1

I have some idea about political thought, and Machiavelli is supposed to have been an early enlightenment thinker, in a conventional sense, and I have read a lot of his works. In fact the definition I like for the enlightenment is a vague negative one i.e. intellectual enquiry not constrained greatly by any external power-structure (predominantly religion). ...


1

It is interesting that this thread has been resuscitated concurrent with Ref request: Reality objective or subjective and its context: What makes things real? May be not just coincidence? @CuriousRomantic has given a view of how advaita differs from pomo that I broadly concur with. For here let me focus on the your — correctly perceived IMHO... ...


1

Philosophically I do not think there is any direct attempt to discuss it before Lyotard in 1979. Not too many other strict philosophers occupied themselves with this concept, and Lyotard did so only as part of a commission from the Conseil des universités du Québec. Obviously in the field of literature it's sooner, as one sees there a more immediate ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible