2 ms·
There can be no progress in philosophy because there's no clear definition or consensus on neither the content, the objectives or the method of philosophy. The
by ofrzeta 8y ago
There can be no progress in philosophy because there's no clear definition or consensus on neither the content, the objectives or the method of philosophy. The very notion of "progress" implies a kind of scientific philosophy that is a very recent (20th century) development.
In my view Analytic Philosophy (that I studied while at university) reduces philosophical thought to linguistic and logical analysis and therefore is a depleted form of philosophy.
If you accept the premise that philosophy should enrich people's lives metaphysical and speculative thoughts clearly can't be excluded. This is also what the (later) Wittgenstein thought, for instance.
With the recent return to ancient thinkers like the Stoa I see that people might get more value out of philosophy. No progress there in the eternal wisdom of humanity.
- Retric 8y agoAssuming I accept your argument. If there can be no progress what's the point? It's fun is a perfectly valid justification IMO, but not something that necessarily brings prestige etc.
- stepvhen 8y agoi think there is value in analytic philosophy, mostly when used as a tool to clear up otherwise muddy issues. Case in point, Jay F. Rosenberg's "Thinking Clearly About Death." In the second half he spends his time clearing up moral arguments about euthenasia, letting die, and rational suicide, using analytic philosophy. he only comes to a definite conclusion on the rational suicide argument, but his clarifications are invaluable in the other cases.