4 ms·
I don't mean to slight Nagel's recent work, which I haven't read, but (honest question here, because I don't have a clue) would you say that Nagel's recent work
by WaltPurvis 10y ago
I don't mean to slight Nagel's recent work, which I haven't read, but (honest question here, because I don't have a clue) would you say that Nagel's recent work is generally considered as important or groundbreaking as what he did 30 and 40 years ago? Because my impression is that Nagel's most impressive work was done decades ago, which, if true, doesn't support the idea that philosophy is currently a vibrant field with lots of groundbreaking work going on.
- woodruffw 10y agoThis isn't a direct response to your question, but people often refer to the last few decades (or even centuries) of philosophy as "current". 40 years may be ancient in experimental science, but it's practically yesterday in philosophy.
- WaltPurvis 10y agoThat's true, but I don't believe the vibrancy of philosophy 30 or 40 years ago would play much of a factor in professional philosophers' current job/life satisfaction. They would probably need to see lots of great work being done over the past two or five years, or at most ten years, to feel excited about the state of their profession. (With some variation based on specialty, e.g., a professor of ancient philosophy probably wouldn't care as much about recent activity as a specialist in modern analytic philosophy, who in turn would probably care less than a philosopher of science.)