Which is First?

Secretly though, it’s about love of self… like all human endeavor.

My passion was almost overwhelming. If we’d been discussing occam’s razor, I would have used a wild font, like comic sans.

And postmoderns consider utterly naive and culture determined, but

without the fruits of phenomenology - even if you are not calling it that - you cannot have empiricism. You have nothing to work with to start positing entities - ontology - your logic is just math, and epistemology would be like trying to do calculus without algebra or even stuff like addistion, etc.

It is kind of a petty point but without studying experience (and having it) well…

I know you’re watching moreno, i can feel your watch.

Introverted experience still falls under phenomenology. Even the qualia ‘ooh, that thought I just had was wise’ is noticed phenomenologically. (redundant)

Ethics needs entities - like other people. So I would put it after ontology which I put after phenomenology.

But I don’t wear one or I become obsessed with time.

LT and FJ each earn a warning. LT gets a month off. Most of the crap has been moved to Rant House.

Moreno - I happen to think that ontology and epistemology, being metaphysics, no longer have much use, so your concerns do not trouble me. And you certainly can have empiricism - it’s no coincidence that the golden age of empiricism coincided with the rise of the scientific method.

  1. Phenomenology is the study of our experience — how we experience.
  2. Ontology is the study of beings or their being — what is.
  3. Epistemology is the study of knowledge — how we know.
  4. Logic is the study of valid reasoning — how to reason.
  5. Ethics is the study of right and wrong — how we should act.

Experience determines what “is”, which determines what we know, with which we may thereafter make logical patterns, and then we can propose ethics about such things.

Yeah, but that fact alone doesn’t give phenomenology precedence. It matters how phenomenology approaches experience, an in the event, it hasn’t done a very good job of it.

you didn’t ask which approach of which field is most fundamental, faust, you asked which field is most fundamental.

also, to boil down phenomenology to a single “it” and to talk about the job that “it” has done…come on, that’s not reasonable. there are numerous approaches to phenomenology and you certainly aren’t well-versed in them all.

Phenomenology is an approach to experience. My view is that it is ineffective. But I’m not trying to determine this for all time. Posters are giving their opinions, and I am giving mine.

How would you know that? I have made the same blanket statement about epistemology and ontology. I think all three are pretty much useless, because I think the motive behind all of them is not useful to good philosophy.

what’s important is not how i would know that, what’s important is that you can’t know that you’re aware of all the approaches. i DO know that, because i can just make a new approach right now and you wouldn’t be aware of it.

Please start another thread with your new approach to phenomenology. I’ll overlook the fact that since you haven’t yet devised this approach, it’s impossible that it is one that I am not aware of - y’know, because it doesn’t exist yet.

guess ya missed the point.

well, you probably are just pretending to have missed the point out of some misguided sense of pride. you probably get it and fundamentally agree, but it’s too late to admit that now, huh?

Please stick to the topic. I am not the topic.

what you said is, though.

To answer the question I allready have to make a valuejudgement, so Ethics it is.

I think i could do without all the rest, if i’d only know how to act.

Or maybe not without logic, as i’d be difficult to study anything without logic.

Yeah, i dunno,maybe logic is first. Can i chose two disciplines to be first?

Off-topic here but having seen the posts moved to the Rant house, and assuming nothing has been completely removed, a one-month ban seems excessive, to say the least.

Maybe this is cheap, but… pyschology. The integration of all these fields. Generalists are underrated. Specialists are typically too political.

Faust, that you denigrate ontology, epistemology, and phenomenology to the degree you do suggests to me that you think it’s important to first know exactly what the best approach is to those subjects, and then you can grapple with the open questions. No?

earth, fire, water, air, aether

I wonder if there’s a connection. :-k