3 ms·
First 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 standard
by michael_dorfman 16y ago
First 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.