I share the positivist view that there is something 'wrong' with philosophy, that the questions it asks are somehow confused. Philosophy therefore can't be addressed on philosophical terms — Snakes Alive
Its particularly true of child development issues. You have to know when to stop asking the child to further define their issues, and simply accept the rough sketch. In my experience, it usually much earlier than many psychologists seem to think. — Pseudonym
The great joy I had from PI was due to reading it as a set of tools more than for the content. Consider, for instance, "Don't think, but look" from ⎰66. It's just brilliant - as in, it illuminates what goes wrong in so much philosophical thinking.
The vast majority of philosophical problems derive from grammatical muddles; here I am using "grammar" in the broad sense of the structure of language and language games. Indeed I am tempted to say if it's not a grammatical problem, it's not a philosophical problem - it belongs to some other field.; That is, it is tempting to posit that philosophy is exactly the study of confusions of language. — Banno
Indeed; Philosophy of Language is, in the end, the whole of philosophy. — Banno
He is, if you like, a struggling Christian in various stages of retreat and denial. — Snakes Alive
unless some philosophy of language is philosophy of mind...
Profesional philosophers have moved on, it seems; but then, they have to do something in order to convince others to pay them. — Banno
Language seems foundational in some sense to philosophy — Sam26
Hm. Philosophy of language or linguistic philosophy. Perhaps we have started out with an issue of ambiguity. I do tend to use "philosophy of language" when strictly I mean "linguistic philosophy"; but then, it was the philosophy of language that led to my adopting linguistic philosophy as a srt of default position. — Banno
That is to say, it describes W.'s method of philosophising as a picture which holds captive its practitioners, as a condition (theoriophobia) which requires therapy! It is said, or at least implied, by its proponents, that someone can be immersed in W.'s method of linguistic analysis only through a volitional switch, which takes place once we have seen and understood what the method shows us. This, of course, is something Virvidakis is sarcastic about. — Πετροκότσυφας
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.