2 ms·
The search for definitions goes back to Socrates -- What is Virtue? What is Justice? Etc... I hardly think this denotes bad philosophy.
by msluyter 18y ago
The search for definitions goes back to Socrates -- What is Virtue? What is Justice? Etc...
I hardly think this denotes bad philosophy.
- nazgulnarsil 18y agoI agree with wittgenstein and the parent. most "philosophy" is arguing over vague definitions. The real meat of philosophy is arguing over axioms. Every system has presuppositions, those can be fruitfully argued about.
- msluyter 18y ago_The real meat of philosophy is arguing over axioms._ Says whom? You're engaging in the very practice the parent is complaining about -- you're attempting to define philosophy in terms suitable to you. In other words, attempting to limit the domain of philosophy to exclude discussion of definitions is an attempt to define philosophy and thus a self-contradiction. This is all besides the point. The original article is a critique of obfuscatory academic writing, and I would assert that one can discuss semantics -- and philosophy generally -- without necessarily being obfuscatory.
- nazgulnarsil 18y agodiscussing semantics is distinct from say discussing how semantic differences across time influence thought. the former I would not define as philosophy, the latter I would. discussing semantics is very easy to categorize. I file it under "discussing semantics".
- Retric 18y agoWords, trying to suggest they have meaning beyond means of communication makes a huge assumption. PS: The idea that magic could work is linked to the assumption that words have power beyond what they do inside peoples heads. As computer people I would hope we can understand that power of "software" is all about moving electrons is some useful fashion. Talking about programs absent the compiler and hardware is missing the point.