RE: Philosophical Analysis

From: Steve Nichols (steve@multisell.com)
Date: Sun Dec 24 2000 - 20:13:08 MST


------------------------------

Date: Sun, 24 Dec 2000 17:10:13 -0500 (EST)
From: Dan Fabulich <daniel.fabulich@yale.edu>
Subject: Philosophical Analysis

>This form of analysis is the kind reserved only for those with plenty
>of time on their hands. (Leisure classes?)

>It is an art in and of itself, and done for much the same reasons.

>You're a better person to the extent that you can appreciate and
>discuss art and philosophy, or at least follow along in such
>discussions. Things like this aren't useful for doing other things.
>They are what life is worth living for.

>If you don't appreciate philosophy, fine. I enjoy discussing it. I
>think it can serve a useful turn or two, but that's really not the
>point. You should get to know philosophy for the same reason you
>should become familiar with good jazz. Maybe you won't like it, for
>all of that. But you'll grow as a person if you do.

OK, I can see that for some philosophy provides entertainment
of a sort ..... but why shouldn't it compete in the marketplace for
funds like jazz does rather than relying off state support?

What I think I dislike about philosophy is its pretension (but I don't like
most jazz either) and the arrogance of philosophers in claiming to
have some 'overview' of other disciplines beyond the understanding
of those who work in these other fields. An aesthetic dislike ...probably,
but I suspect the majority who pick up a journal of contemporary philosophy
will, like myself, either throw up or soon fall asleep.

LVX
www.steve-nichols.com
Posthuman Organisation



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon May 28 2001 - 09:50:40 MDT