3 ms·
> The problem with this line of thinking is that you expect philosophy to offer predictive, objective power. This does not need to be the case - the same reason
by derleth 14y ago
> The problem with this line of thinking is that you expect philosophy to offer predictive, objective power. This does not need to be the case - the same reason why a good piece of literature need not have an objective moral lesson.
So if philosophy is art, why do some philosophers think it needs to be respected on the same level as physics when it comes to understanding the world?
- potatolicious 14y agoBecause art deserves to be respected as much as physics when it comes to understanding the world.
- derleth 14y ago> Because art deserves to be respected as much as physics when it comes to understanding the world. Is there any evidence or argument that could possibly change your mind about this?
- dlitz 14y agoWhat does it even mean to provide an "understanding of the world" if you're not offering predictive, objective power? As far as I know, understanding the world---by definition---means building a mental model of it that has predictive power.
- derleth 14y ago> Because art deserves to be respected as much as physics when it comes to understanding the world. "Because religion deserves to be respected as much as physics when it comes to understanding the world." Is that statement still true?