4 ms·
There is more to philosophy than moral philosophy, and I don’t see why philosophical findings would be devalued by the moral failings of philosophers any more t
by eynsham 3y ago
There is more to philosophy than moral philosophy, and I don’t see why philosophical findings would be devalued by the moral failings of philosophers any more than cardiological findings would be devalued by the alleged unhealthiness of cardiologists.
- ramraj07 3y agoI totally see them being linked and as one of the reasons why there's a general failing of trust on expertise. Here's a clearer analogy; would you sign up with an obese personal trainer? I mean you might say that you personally would but the point stands that most people won't. It's not like I'm asking the philosopher's to cut a toe off to prove their mettle. This is such a simple lifestyle choice that millions of people take for ethical moral reasons anyway. Arguing that they're in a different branch of philosophy also sounds disengenous. I can try and give analogies for that we well but something tells there'll be mor nitpicking.
- eynsham 3y agoIf the only information I had about a personal trainer were their obesity, I wouldn’t. If I were satisfied that they had a long record of success, I would. Philosophers’ work can be and is best assessed by reading it. I do not think that pointing out the limited applicability of your point is remotely disingenuous. There is no guarantee that arguments you would give about other fields of philosophy would be convincing. That is not due to undesirable nitpicking but a general feature of argument.