4 ms·

I'm not sure this logic makes any sense. Science is also very euro-centric, yet most of us here would argue that science is among the most objective discipline

I'm not sure this logic makes any sense. Science is also very euro-centric, yet most of us here would argue that science is among the most objective disciplines out there.

hyperpape 10y ago
It's addressed in the article. They specifically address this point, and argue that philosophy is different, because there are distinctive traditions and approaches in non-western philosophy that nonetheless are recognizably doing philosophy in the same sense as European and American philosophers. In contract, there are Chinese physicists and Chinese mathematicians, but they're doing math and physics the same way that Europeans and Americans do it. Edit: made this non-snarky. Sorry for that.
- bnegreve 10y ago
  You're right, here's the quote: Others might argue against renaming on the grounds that it is unfair to single out philosophy: We do not have departments of Euro-American Mathematics or Physics. This is nothing but shabby sophistry. Non-European philosophical traditions offer distinctive solutions to problems discussed within European and American philosophy, raise or frame problems not addressed in the American and European tradition, or emphasize and discuss more deeply philosophical problems that are marginalized in Anglo-European philosophy. There are no comparable differences in how mathematics or physics are practiced in other contemporary cultures.
  - Kalium 10y ago
    Their response is nothing but shabby sophistry. The search for philosphical truth is not remotely comparable to the ad-hoc as-needed approach used to develop mathematics and physics. Non-European mathematical traditions have developed distinctly to serve their own particular needs in relation to problems not raised, framed, or addressed in the American or European tradition. ----- Point being, their argument is not a very strong response to the critique it purports to address.
- Chris2048 10y ago
  But no examples of this :-/
GFK_of_xmaspast 10y ago
Is that the same science that advances one funeral at a time.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
erikpukinskis 10y ago
Speak for yourself. I think the sciences are just as subjective as any other field. There are some semi-objective moments, but the bulk of the work is just cultural traditions playing out without any sort of introspection. Scientists tend to discourage any kind of meta-awareness which arguably makes it less objective than other practices. The fiction of objectivity inhibits study of the origins of knowledge.

I'm not sure this logic makes any sense. Science is also very euro-centric, yet most of us here would argue that science is among the most objective disciplines out there.

hyperpape 10y ago

It's addressed in the article. They specifically address this point, and argue that philosophy is different, because there are distinctive traditions and approaches in non-western philosophy that nonetheless are recognizably doing philosophy in the same sense as European and American philosophers. In contract, there are Chinese physicists and Chinese mathematicians, but they're doing math and physics the same way that Europeans and Americans do it. Edit: made this non-snarky. Sorry for that.

bnegreve 10y ago
You're right, here's the quote: Others might argue against renaming on the grounds that it is unfair to single out philosophy: We do not have departments of Euro-American Mathematics or Physics. This is nothing but shabby sophistry. Non-European philosophical traditions offer distinctive solutions to problems discussed within European and American philosophy, raise or frame problems not addressed in the American and European tradition, or emphasize and discuss more deeply philosophical problems that are marginalized in Anglo-European philosophy. There are no comparable differences in how mathematics or physics are practiced in other contemporary cultures.
- Kalium 10y ago
  Their response is nothing but shabby sophistry. The search for philosphical truth is not remotely comparable to the ad-hoc as-needed approach used to develop mathematics and physics. Non-European mathematical traditions have developed distinctly to serve their own particular needs in relation to problems not raised, framed, or addressed in the American or European tradition. ----- Point being, their argument is not a very strong response to the critique it purports to address.
Chris2048 10y ago
But no examples of this :-/

GFK_of_xmaspast 10y ago

Is that the same science that advances one funeral at a time.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

erikpukinskis 10y ago

Speak for yourself. I think the sciences are just as subjective as any other field. There are some semi-objective moments, but the bulk of the work is just cultural traditions playing out without any sort of introspection. Scientists tend to discourage any kind of meta-awareness which arguably makes it less objective than other practices. The fiction of objectivity inhibits study of the origins of knowledge.