Recent Responses
This is a question about philosophy. Reading the beginnings of Wikipedia's timelines of Eastern and Western philosophers, we find Thales, Anaximander, Pythagoras, Guang Zhong, Confucius, Sun Tzu and a few more as the first philosophers. By the time these guys lived, there were other written non-fiction (or allegedly non-fiction) works. What is the difference between philosophy and the other non-fiction stuff (especially in those times)?
Nickolas Pappas
May 29, 2014
(changed May 29, 2014)
Permalink
Any responsible answer to this question has to be highly qualified and surrounded by admissions of ignorance. I’ll try not to get bogged down by describing what we don’t know, but you should realize how inconclusive any answer to your excellent question has to be.I don’t know enough about non-We... Read more
I've been reading Polanyi's book on Tacit Knowledge. Can anyone update me as to the current philosophical status or consensus on this concept, or the (I assume) related concept of intuition? Polanyi also argues that the existence of tacit knowledge dissolves the Meno paradox and supports some appeals to authority. Any update on the status of these views? Thanks!
William Rapaport
May 29, 2014
(changed May 29, 2014)
Permalink
From a cognitive science perspective (as opposed to a purely philosophical perspective), you should take a look at Daniel Kahneman's book, Thinking Fast and SlowI have a bibliography on the topic (again from the cog sci perspective) hereHope this helps!
Log in to post commen... Read more
In paradoxes such as the Epimenides 'liar' example, is it not sufficient to say that all such sentences are inherently contradictory and therefore without meaning? Like Chomsky's 'the green river sleeps furiously', it's a sentence, to be sure, but that's all it is. Thanks in advance :)
Stephen Maitzen
June 5, 2014
(changed June 5, 2014)
Permalink
Thank you for the argument for that claim, but your reasons for it do not particularly interest me.
Wow. How very philosophical. We philosophers aren't interested in each other's reasons, after all. Now, am I supposed to be interested in the reasons you're giving for your claims?
I've given a num... Read more
In paradoxes such as the Epimenides 'liar' example, is it not sufficient to say that all such sentences are inherently contradictory and therefore without meaning? Like Chomsky's 'the green river sleeps furiously', it's a sentence, to be sure, but that's all it is. Thanks in advance :)
Stephen Maitzen
June 5, 2014
(changed June 5, 2014)
Permalink
Thank you for the argument for that claim, but your reasons for it do not particularly interest me.
Wow. How very philosophical. We philosophers aren't interested in each other's reasons, after all. Now, am I supposed to be interested in the reasons you're giving for your claims?
I've given a num... Read more
I have 17 years I am really into philosophy . I would give everything to go and study it . But there is one problem. My parents doesn't know where can philosophy take me(job , career ) . I never thought about it so if you could help me PLS
Lisa Cassidy
May 23, 2014
(changed May 23, 2014)
Permalink
Dear Friend - I have a couple of ideas about careers, but we can get to that in a minute. Since you are already a fan of philosophy, I won't bother telling you its virtues. But you might want to try telling your parents what you love about it and show your passion for it so that they have a sense... Read more
Can being constantly surrounded by ugly things and people ruin own's sense of the aesthetic? Conversely, can constantly being surrounded by beautiful things and people ruin own's sense of the aesthetic?
Allen Stairs
May 22, 2014
(changed May 22, 2014)
Permalink
Let's start with the phrase "ruin one's own sense of the aesthetic." There might be different ways to interpret that, but the reading that first occurred to me was something like "undermine one's ability to appreciate things aesthetically" or perhaps "undermine one's ability to make sound aesthetic... Read more
It seems to me that much contemporary philosophy is a bit obsessed with clarifying arguments and analyzing statements and lacks real wisdom about the world. For example, I can imagine a typical situation where an ordinary person asks a professional philosopher a question relating to an applied ethics question. The philosopher answers by analysing the component parts of the statements contained within the question and attempting to assess the technicalities of the implicit argument put forward by the ordinary person. The outcome is that everybody is none the wiser as to the real answer to the applied ethics question because the philosopher has no real wisdom about the world but is merely trying to analyse argument structures! What do you think about this? Thanks
Daniel Koltonski
June 6, 2014
(changed June 6, 2014)
Permalink
I'm not sure that the outcome of analysing arguments is always that no one is any wiser concerning the issue at stake. And that's because there are several possible results of such analysis, all of which would seem to help us better understand the issue at stake and the justifiability of possibl... Read more
Can being constantly surrounded by ugly things and people ruin own's sense of the aesthetic? Conversely, can constantly being surrounded by beautiful things and people ruin own's sense of the aesthetic?
Allen Stairs
May 22, 2014
(changed May 22, 2014)
Permalink
Let's start with the phrase "ruin one's own sense of the aesthetic." There might be different ways to interpret that, but the reading that first occurred to me was something like "undermine one's ability to appreciate things aesthetically" or perhaps "undermine one's ability to make sound aesthetic... Read more
Is judging a person by their intelligence analogous to racism? A person can't help the genetics that determines their intellectual capacity and the belief in the superiority of intelligent people seems to arguably be a basis for social inequalities.
Charles Taliaferro
May 22, 2014
(changed May 22, 2014)
Permalink
Great question! Some preliminary thoughts: Racism seems to involve treating a group of persons who share an ethnic identity with derision, disrespect, and partial disadvantage. Accounts of racism today are controversial, but I propose that a comprehensive account of racism should involve b... Read more
Can a person be a historian and a philosopher at the same time. I have a passion for history and a joint passion for Philosophy? Nathan V.
Charles Taliaferro
May 22, 2014
(changed May 22, 2014)
Permalink
Yes The clearest case of when you would need to be both a historian and a philosopher is when you write a history of philosophy. Expertise in both fields would also be highly valuable in writing philosophy of history. Apart from these two categories, the blending of philosophy and history (... Read more