3 ms·

> We cannot somehow derive some universal standard of "fairness" because no such thing exists. And we don't need philosophers to tell us that. But you're doing

> We cannot somehow derive some universal standard of "fairness" because no such thing exists. And we don't need philosophers to tell us that. But you're doing it right now? I agree and would like to subscribe to your philosophy newsletter ^^ Kidding aside, I have to think of this talk by Erich Fromm, "Psychology for non-psychologists", where he starts off with saying there everybody is a bit of a psychologist, otherwise we wouldn't be able to even navigate and survive infancy. The same with what you just said and philosophy in general, I think. The only difference between a hot take on a forum (which is grounded in your experience and thoughts you had previously about it) and "a philosopher" would be doing it full time and for money I guess, or being known for your claims, but that's secondary IMO.

lisper 3y ago
> But you're doing it right now? Sorry, what exactly is the "it" that am I doing right now (or was doing right then)? > everybody is a bit of a psychologist Sure. So? > The same with what you just said and philosophy in general Sure. So? Everyone is a bit of an amateur everything. That doesn't mean that everything that people do can be meaningfully elevated to the level of a profession. > "a philosopher" would be doing it full time and for money Yes, exactly. Everyone is an amateur philosopher just as everyone is (say) an amateur thumb-sucker at some point in their lives. That doesn't mean that there ought to be an elite cadre of thumb suckers who get paid to do it.