• Txastopher
    187
    Much of the discourse on the forum substitutes explanation and argument for Philosopher Top Trumps, which I find frustrating.

    Surely, the history of philosophy is a means to an end rather than cultural capital that can be played in lieu of intellectual agility?

    One of the the great historical questions of philosophy regards the causes of the cultural flourishing in fifth century Athens. Could it be that they weren't bogged down ostentatiously signalling their declarative knowledge, preferring instead to develop their reasoning faculties?

    When Alfred North Whitehead described the European philosophical tradition as footnotes to Plato, perhaps he meant it as a criticism of his contemporaries rather than praise for the Greeks.
  • Moliere
    4.7k
    Well, Hegel said... ;)

    I often fall back to interpretation in thinking through questions. Guilty as charged.

    But I can offer a reason -- it strikes me that the people in the history of philosophy are better thinkers than myself.

    There is the danger of doing the opposite -- to think without history. The problem there being that you're probably going to reinvent the wheel of mistakes that have already been made. And interpretation, in its own right, also sharpens one's reasoning -- because you have to make arguments for different readings.
bold
italic
underline
strike
code
quote
ulist
image
url
mention
reveal
youtube
tweet
Add a Comment

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

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.