3 ms·
Structure is needed to accomplish something. You're thoroughly missing my point, let me try an analogy: I am going to gather 100 fools, and ask each, what they
by alexashka 9y ago
Structure is needed to accomplish something. You're thoroughly missing my point, let me try an analogy:
I am going to gather 100 fools, and ask each, what they imagine life on mars must be like. I am then going to structure their opinions, write them down in books, and so on.
Replace 'life on mars' with 'human nature'. I fail to see the difference between my example and the presented article.
Now if someone were to go study physics, invent a rocket, get into the rocket, fly to Mars, and have the ability to report back their findings - that'd be discovering life on mars.
I'd listen to his/her take on life on mars with great interest. I'd call that a scientist with an informed opinion.
- hangtwenty 9y agoName dropping can be counter productive, sure, but at best it is shorthand. If one had to re hash every prior argument one would never get around to original discussion.
- Barrin92 9y agoBut Rousseau was no fool in the field of philosophy, he was in fact one of the chief contributors to the philosophy of human nature, so that analogy makes no sense at all. His ideas are still very relevant and have seen a resurgence in recent years, as he was one of the first philosophers to tie his philosophy of human nature to a political and social criticism of elites, something that is again extremely topical today.
- memonkey 9y agoI think the difference between your example and the article's is that it's easier to dismiss an account of 100 fools and only with a little effort and maybe some arrogance to dismiss bodies of work promoted by various reputable institutions. Work done in this way probably makes the only way we can communicate complex ideas more "robust".