|
7068
|
If infatuation with science leads to bad scientism, its rejection leads to obscurantism [Critchley]
|
|
Full Idea:
If what is mistaken in much contemporary philosophy is its infatuation with science, which leads to scientism, then the equally mistaken rejection of science leads to obscurantism.
|
|
From:
Simon Critchley (Continental Philosophy - V. Short Intro [2001], Ch.1)
|
|
A reaction:
Clearly a balance has to be struck. I take philosophy to be a quite separate discipline from science, but it is crucial that philosophy respects the physical facts, and scientists are the experts there. Scientists are philosophers' most valued servants.
|
|
7075
|
To meet the division in our life, try the Subject, Nature, Spirit, Will, Power, Praxis, Unconscious, or Being [Critchley]
|
|
Full Idea:
Against the Kantian division of a priori and empirical, Fichte offered activity of the subject, Schelling offered natural force, Hegel offered Spirit, Schopenhauer the Will, Nietzsche power, Marx praxis, Freud the unconscious, and Heidegger offered Being.
|
|
From:
Simon Critchley (Continental Philosophy - V. Short Intro [2001])
|
|
A reaction:
The whole of Continental Philosophy summarised in a sentence. Fichte and Schopenhauer seem to point to existentialism, Schelling gives evolutionary teleology, Marx abandons philosophy, the others are up the creek.
|
|
8511
|
Stout first explicitly proposed that properties and relations are particulars [Stout,GF, by Campbell,K]
|
|
Full Idea:
In modern times, it was G.F. Stout who first explicitly made the proposal that properties and relations are as particular as the substances that they qualify.
|
|
From:
report of G.F. Stout (The Nature of Universals and Propositions [1923]) by Keith Campbell - The Metaphysic of Abstract Particulars §1
|
|
A reaction:
Note that relations will have to be tropes, as well as properties. Williams wants tropes to be parts of objects, but that will be tricky with relations. If you place two objects on a table, how does the 'to the left of' trope come into existence?
|
|
3643
|
The concept of mind excludes body, and vice versa [Descartes]
|
|
Full Idea:
The concept of body includes nothing at all which belongs to the mind, and the concept of mind includes nothing at all which belongs to the body.
|
|
From:
René Descartes (Reply to Fourth Objections [1641], 225)
|
|
A reaction:
A headache? Hunger? The mistake, I think, is to regard the mind as entirely conscious, thus creating a sharp boundary between two aspects of our lives. As shown by blindsight, I take many of my central mental operations to be pre- or non-conscious.
|