![]() |
Philosophy gone stale?
Do modern, contemporary philosophers tackle 'the big questions' of metaphysics and epistemology with the same verve, panache and inspiration of those who are no longer with us?
Is pioneering work in modern philosophy becoming indistinguishable from poineering work in mathematics and science? The days of the 'multi-competent' philosophers are long since passed. A modern-day Aristotle will not and could not occur. Like our economy, our pioneering philosophies and philosophers have become specialised and therefore largely impenetrable to those without esoteric knowledge. For me, this is something of a lamentable state of affairs. Yes, the world is a better place for the developments within it. But how can the modernday philosopher not yearn for the days of the Plato's, Aristotle's, Plotinus', Augustine's and even the Aquinas' where the societal value of the philosopher's omnicompetence or skills were significant and appreciated. In today's philosophy, great philosophers of our century- Sartre, Moore, Russell, Wittgenstein and Heidegger among them- and their philosophies- a more a matter of private entertainment than public, societal relevance. Reaction/ opposition to this view welcome. Specforces |
I think modern philosophers have just given up on those quesitons.
We have finally admitted that we just don't know and we're going to have to wait until we die to find out. Now, if you come up with your own idea on how the universe works, you're usually called a nutjob, and if you get others to believe you, you're a cult leader. I coudl be wrong on this one though. However, the majority of philosophical thought has moved into the politcal spectrum. More is concerned with what is right and wrong and how a free society should act is the hot philosophical debate of the day. Incorrectly, it's been split into the left and right wing, and people in the centre who don't really care as long as it doesn't affect their lives too drastically. |
Nicely said, Spec. Interesting topic you bring up. I agree.
|
There is no such thing as a man so grand as the ones back in the days of Plato. Back then, everything was a discovery, just like a child knowing nothing of the world. The could observe a few things about many subjects and be good enough to make discoveries in many areas.
Think of a circle with you standing in the center. People of the day were only able to touch a certain amount, because they could only reach a certain amount. Now think of someone much larger. They might be able to touch almost the entire think at once. This is your Plato. Well the circle of our knowledge has increased a hundred times. Now that exact same person would be unable to touch a lot of the circle. The circle is too big and changes too often to be able to handle more than just a little bit of it at a time. Even the biggest people are very limited, but only because our knowledge is so grand compared to the days of Plato. Anyone get my metaphor? |
I agree spec, cenright.
|
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:34 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright FlashFlashRevolution