3 ms·
The four levels of scientific thought, by cousin_it: 1. This is true 2. This works 3. This sounds true 4. This sounds neat With all due respect, the exampl
by cousin_it 16y ago
The four levels of scientific thought, by cousin_it:
1. This is true
2. This works
3. This sounds true
4. This sounds neat
With all due respect, the example of Derrida's deconstruction that you give ("pharmakos" and all that) doesn't seem to rise above level 4.
- michael_dorfman 16y agoFirst of all: who called it "scientific thought"? I'm sorry that my one-paragraph summary of Derrida's reading of the Phaedrus was not up to your high standards. Perhaps you would like to offer a one-paragraph summary of some other reading of the Phaedrus that you think rises above level 4?
- cullenking 16y agoI think the point is, who cares about a philosophical reading of Phaedrus? What does this do for society as a whole? Does this advance people towards a better understanding of life and nature? What does this do to raise living standards or promote equality for people who do not have it? I think this is the main portion of the debate: all this talk is nonsense in any bigger picture.
- michael_dorfman 16y agoIn that case, your argument isn't with Derrida or deconstruction, but with philosophy. That's a whole other discussion.