I know it sounds strange. But I have committed myself, as someone who considers themselves more of a writer than a philosopher, to doing such. It’s my meditation and Einstein’s wardrobe. It will serve as a catchall for those moments in my life when I absolutely cannot seem to consolidate the things I want to write about into a consistent 500 to 1000 word whole. It will serve as my fallback.
Just know that it is because, regardless, I have to keep writing –even when I may not want to. As Patricia Hempl said (concerning writers):
Just keep talking. Mumbling is fine.
Philosophy, to me, seems to be interplay between the creative and the critical.
Philosophy, as an armchair discipline, lets its mind wonder, then tests the concepts formed against reality. This was the main point I was trying to make when responding to FJ:
Flannel Jesus wrote:Philosophy is MUCH more forgiving. In the thousands of years that we've been doing philosophy, almost nothing is wholly philosophically rejected. I can't even name a single idea that, when you read about it in a history-of-philosophy book, you'd read "They used to believe this philosophical idea, but it's since been proven false." Not solipsism, not Plato's ideas, not Aristotles ideas, not the ideas of the Stoics, not the ideas of Aquinas. Philosophy accepts all and rejects none. That's the epitome of forgiving.
Science, on the other hand, has no qualms with rejection. Science has, wholly and unambiguously, rejected numerous attempts at describing the laws of physics, chemistry, models of the atom, etc etc. And it's not just a 'most scientists have rejected this idea' sort of rejection, it's a 'This is definitively NOT the case' kind of rejection. A kind of rejection that's basically nonexistent in philosophy.
So, if someone somewhere in their head knows that they're a bad thinker, but they have so much to say anyway and just can't help themselves, what seems more appealing? Philosophy.
Why do you think people often end up on ILP complaining about the moderation on some science forum they were on? The science forums are much less forgiving, that's why. Science is much less forgiving, that's why.
Actually a good point, FJ. Touche, man!
This, to me, suggests that those who would choose that philosophy kiss the ass of science (the amateur analytic) have a limited view of what philosophy can do. I have to wonder how far they can develop in it.
At the same time, I have to oppose the KTS continental approach in that I believe the only right approach to becoming the Neitzschean Overman is doing so for the weak. It seems to me the only reason that God, or fate, or whatever you want to call it, would determine an individual to be as such would be for the heroic. It would be a gift and should be treated as such.
The point was to emphasize the difference between philosophy and science that FJ’s post suggested. My take on it is that the reason philosophical concepts tend to outlive bad (or less than great) scientific concepts is that philosophical concepts tend to be rooted in us in an almost poetic way. It works from a more intuitive level.
My point concerning KTS was that, from my perspective, the issues they are pimping are, as far as I’m concerned, the dark side of the very method I am using. In a sense, you have to give credit to the more analytic in that the more continental approach tends to be a little more susceptible to confirmation bias. The reason KTS gets away with what they do is because, much like some of my Right-wing friends, they can focus on certain aspects of reality. That, with radicalism of it, allows for a kind of Cassandra Complex in which their beliefs are confirmed by the general rejection of them.
At the same time, is the scientific method really that immune to "confirmation bias"?
When I first started my present job, one of my trainers told me that the key to being a good maintenance man is learning how to fix your mistakes.
?:doesn’t this string give just such an opportunity on this board.
One of the primary characteristics of a shitty day is being at that point where you’re struggling to get to a place where you know you can finally relax but find yourself faced with obstacles every step of the way to it. It gets even worse when you get there only to find being there presents more problems: such as when I got to my bar and found out I couldn’t get online.
I have had just such a day. But then it did inspire me to do this. And I think this will solve some problems for me.
This is my fallback, friends.
Feel free to use it as yours as well.
It's been said that even the act of making a sandwich implies a question of whether life is worth going on with:
we work from the mundane to the philosophical.