The question of this OP is, what, for you, are your anchors in your thinking-about-thinking, which is what I take philosophy to be? Or another way, when you're done, how do you know you've done anything other, or more, than merely entertain yourself? — tim wood
Try answering. If Wittgenstein is your answer (god alone knows how!) then make your case. — tim wood
It's a very nice post, Wallow, but why not pick at it? In taking a "methodological approach," you're already presupposing a set of concerns and an entire argument about them.So, taking a methodological approach to the concerns of philosophy, — Wallows
Um, well, what does Wittgenstein say, if anything, about logic and symbolic logic including maths? I'm asking, not arguing. If you're defining a region; i.e., that which falls within Wittgenstein's bailiwick, then so far you've indicated a region of concerns, but not ground or anchors.which can only take place in the form of language and communication, — Wallows
Bewitchment? Ok, but how does Wittgenstein break the spell - or does he?if philosophy is meant to be therapeutic, which philosophy is essentially existential or originates from existential questions like "Why?", then I don't see how else to describe it than pointing someone towards what Wittgenstein had to say about our bewitchment with language. Still, circular you might say... — Wallows
I've heard it said that the history of philosophy just is philosophy. I've read enough to encounter for myself the encounter of ideas, enough to know that many so-called insights are in substance reactions to something, borrowing strength, as it were, from that which they oppose, and in particular lacking strength to stand independently. I take Descartes and scholastic realism to be a thinker and a thinking, each of which had their day, but that now belong to the history rather than the current concerns of philosophy.if we seek to understand what the heck is going on in philosophy, then we must acquaint ourselves with how philosophy was reinterpreted by past great thinkers that introduced a paradigm shift. — Wallows
In my opinion, it would be worthy instruction if you could lay out one example of such a question or problem, and its dissolution, it it has been "dissolved."If traditional philosophy is characterized as different attempts at answering various philosophical questions then Wittgenstein's philosophy may be characterized as a systematic questioning of the questions themselves. Wittgenstein was reported to have said that he didn't solve philosophical problems, but rather dissolved them. And, if the sake of resolution is clarity, then the complete dissolvement of these questions is what is sought after, which has been elaborated by Wittgenstein himself to such great lengths. — Wallows
It's a very nice post, Wallow, but why not pick at it? — tim wood
In taking a "methodological approach," you're already presupposing a set of concerns and an entire argument about them. — tim wood
Um, well, what does Wittgenstein say, if anything, about logic and symbolic logic including maths? I'm asking, not arguing. — tim wood
If you're defining a region; i.e., that which falls within Wittgenstein's bailiwick, then so far you've indicated a region of concerns, but not ground or anchors. — tim wood
Bewitchment? Ok, but how does Wittgenstein break the spell - or does he? — tim wood
I've heard it said that the history of philosophy just is philosophy. — tim wood
I've read enough to encounter for myself the encounter of ideas, enough to know that many so-called insights are in substance reactions to something, borrowing strength, as it were, from that which they oppose, and in particular lacking strength to stand independently. I take Descartes and scholastic realism to be a thinker and a thinking, each of which had their day, but that now belong to the history rather than the current concerns of philosophy. — tim wood
In my opinion, it would be worthy instruction if you could lay out one example of such a question or problem, and its dissolution, it it has been "dissolved." — tim wood
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.