4 ms·
Whenever I looked into what most philosophers publish, I just saw vagueness, poor thinking and little value. What's a philosophical problem or question (unders
by RivieraKid 9y ago
Whenever I looked into what most philosophers publish, I just saw vagueness, poor thinking and little value.
What's a philosophical problem or question (understandable by someone who hasn't studied philosophy) I would need a philosophy book to answer?
- foldr 9y agoDid "looking into" it involve reading it or not?
- RivieraKid 9y agoIt involved some reading.
- vanderZwan 9y ago> Whenever I looked into what most philosophers publish Oh, most philosophers even? So you have taken a good look at the field and have a grasp of the philosophical community and their methods of inquiry and communication? > vagueness If there is one thing I have learned because I switched from studying physics to studying contemporary art, is that when I consider something "vague", it often boils down to my own assumptions and premises. By the standard of what is considered the right way to acquire knowledge in physics, most art is "vague". But the problem is me insisting on judging it by those terms. > poor thinking To elaborate on my previous point: you cannot apply the lines of thinking of one field to the other and judge it by that without also putting in the effort of understanding the lines of thinking of that other field. I have my doubts as to whether you are not mistaken an unfamiliar way of thinking for poor thinking. > little value Well given the two before it, there is indeed little value for you. Then again, I don't read or speak Chinese, so even the most beautiful poetry bundle written in simplified Chinese would hold little value for me too.
- leephillips 9y agoWould it be wrong for someone to catch stray puppies and slowly torture them to death in his basement? Why or why not? Can you not only convince yourself with your answer, but others? And yes, ethics is a part of philosophy.
- RivieraKid 9y agoDepends on how you define "wrong" exactly. It feels wrong to most people.
- leephillips 9y agoExactly. Good philosophers are careful with definitions. Do you think there's enough space on your one page to define your terms and reach a conclusion that would satisfy most reasonable people?
- RivieraKid 9y agoWell, I wouldn't include ethics at all, I think it falls under biology, psychology, sociology. The core of philosophy is basically understanding consciousnes, not too much else to it. But I guess one page was an exaggeration, let's say five.
- leephillips 9y agoThose sciences don't touch upon what ethics is about, which is what is good and bad, right and wrong. There is no "core of philosophy", and it's certainly not confined to "understanding consciousness". I'd have to agree with others here who have tried to admonish you that you're arguing from ignorance and being unserious, even if a great deal of what passes for philosophy is a waste of time. What about logic, philosophy of mathematics, philosophy of language, ...?
- RivieraKid 9y agoTrue, but this is where ethics logcally belongs to. It's just an aspect of human behavior and inner world. Asking what is good or bad is like asking what is the definition of these words. Well, the definition is whatever we agree on. IMost people call "bad" the behavior, that triggers specific emotion of "wrongness". I think that consciousness and closely related topics is the hard part, other things such as ethics or aesthetics have quite mundane explanations. Philosophy of mathematics nad language is somewhere in between.
- marnett 9y agoWhat philosophers? What books?