On some thread Calrid mentioned or questioned–whether philosophy was dying.
If I have that wrong Calrid I apologize. But I thought it was a question that is good to ask every so often.
If philosopy is the love of wisdom then I think philosophy is dying on ILP. Maybe this should be on the hall of questions.
Still need the asked for definitions for the sake of clarity. Philosophy, if it entails the quest to know how and why we know anything, will not die in our lifetimes because all answers to these questions require a knowledge of evolving “answers” and their projections into a future that has not yet become an omega of understanding. In that sense I would agree that certain types of philosophy may be ill, but not dead. These types include verification, justification of ideas by analytic methods that seek some ultimate ground, final end, or mathematical certainty, experiential reality as some Hegelian position of subjective and objective awareness in polar opposition and in need of synthesis and the highly romanticized notion of unresolvable conflicts between philosophy and science, philosophy and religion, religion and science, etc.
Forgetting about the concerns of others and their assumptions, what if it did die? What is it you could not do to live simply and peacefully in this world?
Exactly. We are asking the same questions over and over. If there were actual answers the questions would rest, but they don’t. So the answers are inadequate or don’t need to be asked.
I think the kind of philosophy that most people think about w/ romanticized notions of poetic words having big impacts on society has been dead. That’s why they don’t teach Nietzsche after the 1st year of undergrad or so.
Philosophy is in fact very much alive. It’s just that no one who’s actually doing it is writing stuff that’s intellectually accessible to most people.
Wherever and whenever politics and religion are both strong, philosophy will flounder.
The French are doing philosophy, because while they’re all Catholics, no one really cares that they are Catholic. Nor do they care about politics, unless there’s a strike on, or a new shortening of the work week on the table. Unfortunately, the French are historically and notoriously bad at philosophy, which they are hard at work proving once again.
The English are quite good at philosophy, but take themselves too seriously. Once they realised that they were no longer the greatest nation on earth, they could no longer endure in philosophy. Language, Truth and Logic was the last of it - soon after, even Ayer turned backwards and was mostly a critic.
The Germans are forever looking back in embarrassment, and it has finally got to them this time. Hegel, Nietzsche, Marx, Hitler - you name 'em; the Germans have been ultimately embarrassed by 'em. Wittgenstein is easily the most embarrassing, because he is neither good, like Nietzsche, nor great, like Kant. He was a better philosopher than Kant, but in the Philo game, epistemology rules, so he is ultimately a minor figure - that the English and Americans had prematurely made into a rock star. But even he disavowed his seminal work. How are the Germans supposed to feel about it? The Germans suffer from chronic regret. Once they get over this one, they’ll be back, stronger than ever. Don’t you worry.
The Americans have had their moments, but politics and religion are stronger here than ever. There’s not much hope.
Wait, hold the phone matey. Who’s realised what now?
Mister Faust, are you forgetting Heidegger? He’s embarrassing on political and religious levels too. The Germans have the Frankfurt school, which keeps them in self-flagellation for a while.
If you want to see live philosophy, bone up on neo-confucianism. That is the coming star attraction. How the West will react is going to be interesting…