3 ms·

Academic philosophers have consensus on many things. That doesn’t make them correct, merely a reflection of what a societal group thinks. The notion of agreeme

Academic philosophers have consensus on many things. That doesn’t make them correct, merely a reflection of what a societal group thinks. The notion of agreement or compromise is antithetical to philosophy, so I’m not sure how that would be relevant. That is the domain of politics.

Iv 6y ago
Can you name one thing there is a consensus on, in academic philosophy?
- keiferski 6y ago
  https://old.reddit.com/r/askphilosophy/comments/es98yo/has_any_philosophical_problem_been_solved_why_or/fg324tw/ https://old.reddit.com/r/askphilosophy/comments/es98yo/has_a... Adding to that, you’ll also find that most philosophers are atheists / non-theists while most theologians are theists, which is why I said a consensus mostly reflects social groups and not any final say on the topic.
  - Iv 6y ago
    "Possible worlds exist" -> Damn what a breakthrough Yes, I agree that once you remove all the theists from the domain and are ready to call out people who do theology badly disguised as philosophy, the field becomes a bit clearer.
    - keiferski 6y ago
      That isn’t what I said nor is it the conclusion I’m drawing. The field becomes “clearer” because people who are not atheists then self-filter themselves out, don’t become philosophers, etc. It has nothing to do with the legitimacy or illegitimacy of theology. Which is exactly why you should be skeptical of philosophical consensus on social issues. Philosophers are subject to the same social pressures and effects as any other human group.
- yboris 6y ago
  There is a philosopher survey organized by David Chalmers Results: https://philpapers.org/surveys/results.pl https://philpapers.org/surveys/results.pl
  - Iv 6y ago
    Hilarious that nothing has more than 81% agreement. And here again, the same thing happens: I did not know Newcomb's box problems, so I google it, I find that people Newcomb and people who solved it are all actually scientists (The problem is vague and there are two ways to fill in the gaps, leading to an apparent paradox). Yet philosophers are split in their answers.
HKH2 6y ago
Charitable interpretation is quite important in philosophical argumentation; it could be construed as a form of emotional compromise, and is certainly about avoiding unnecessary disagreement.
- keiferski 6y ago
  That’s true, but I’d categorize it more as a social factor affecting philosophers and not philosophy itself. But of course we would get lost in endless debates about this.
  - HKH2 6y ago
    Does a philosophical hermit ever choose to not come back, and yet remain philosophizing? I doubt it. I agree that the social aspects are not the apparent point of philosophy though. We can clearly benefit from exploring ideas without attempting to unify society as a whole.

Iv 6y ago

Can you name one thing there is a consensus on, in academic philosophy?

keiferski 6y ago
https://old.reddit.com/r/askphilosophy/comments/es98yo/has_any_philosophical_problem_been_solved_why_or/fg324tw/ https://old.reddit.com/r/askphilosophy/comments/es98yo/has_a... Adding to that, you’ll also find that most philosophers are atheists / non-theists while most theologians are theists, which is why I said a consensus mostly reflects social groups and not any final say on the topic.
- Iv 6y ago
  "Possible worlds exist" -> Damn what a breakthrough Yes, I agree that once you remove all the theists from the domain and are ready to call out people who do theology badly disguised as philosophy, the field becomes a bit clearer.
  - keiferski 6y ago
    That isn’t what I said nor is it the conclusion I’m drawing. The field becomes “clearer” because people who are not atheists then self-filter themselves out, don’t become philosophers, etc. It has nothing to do with the legitimacy or illegitimacy of theology. Which is exactly why you should be skeptical of philosophical consensus on social issues. Philosophers are subject to the same social pressures and effects as any other human group.
yboris 6y ago
There is a philosopher survey organized by David Chalmers Results: https://philpapers.org/surveys/results.pl https://philpapers.org/surveys/results.pl
- Iv 6y ago
  Hilarious that nothing has more than 81% agreement. And here again, the same thing happens: I did not know Newcomb's box problems, so I google it, I find that people Newcomb and people who solved it are all actually scientists (The problem is vague and there are two ways to fill in the gaps, leading to an apparent paradox). Yet philosophers are split in their answers.

HKH2 6y ago

Charitable interpretation is quite important in philosophical argumentation; it could be construed as a form of emotional compromise, and is certainly about avoiding unnecessary disagreement.

keiferski 6y ago
That’s true, but I’d categorize it more as a social factor affecting philosophers and not philosophy itself. But of course we would get lost in endless debates about this.
- HKH2 6y ago
  Does a philosophical hermit ever choose to not come back, and yet remain philosophizing? I doubt it. I agree that the social aspects are not the apparent point of philosophy though. We can clearly benefit from exploring ideas without attempting to unify society as a whole.