the reader must adopt these uses — creativesoul
This is not so much a book of metaphysics as a book about metaphysics. What I have chiefly tried to do in it is neither to expound my own metaphysical ideas, nor to criticize the metaphysical ideas of other people ; but to explain what metaphysics is, why it is necessary to the well-being and advancement of knowledge, and how it is to be pursued.
In the second place I have tried to dispel certain misconceptions about it which have led (and, had they been true, would have led with perfect justice) to the conclusion that metaphysics is a blind alley of thought into which knaves and fools have combined these many centuries past to lure the human intellect to its destruction.
In the third place I have offered to the reader’s attention a few examples of metaphysics itself, in order to show how metaphysical inquiry will be conducted if the principles laid down in the opening chapters are taken as sound.
it still retains a kind of old worlde charm. — Wayfarer
Should anyone here wish to argue definitions, they're in the wrong thread. — creativesoul
By way of footnote, a recent essay by a philosophical biographer, Ray Monk, on Collingwood's early death, his replacement by Glibert Ryle, and its consequences. How the untimely death of RG Collingwood changed the course of philosophy forever. Paints a very sympathetic portrait. — Wayfarer
grant definitions/senses of key terms. — creativesoul
This text is a pleasure to read. Elegant, amusing and precise. Seems like the writings of a true gentleman. — Olivier5
For you cannot insist that Hume was mistaken to question the uniformity of nature on the basis of it being an absolute presupposition, without adopting the dogmatic ontological standpoint that absolute presuppositions constitute objective existential claims — sime
To quite the contrary, he seemed to relish in the discomfort of others.
So was he a 'true gentleman'? That remains unanswered from my vantage point. — creativesoul
I've yet to have understood exactly what it picks out to the exclusion of all else. — creativesoul
...it is better just to read him first and then take on the critics. — tim wood
One is that I followed his reasoning and adhered to it, by and large. I share his analysis of presuppositions. I'm saying this just so my critiques below are taken for what they are: sympathetic overall. — Olivier5
keep getting the feeling that I need to read what I've already read, yet again — creativesoul
He lashes out at certain notions and thinkers in ways that sometimes may antagonize. I do the same here, often, so shouldn't I agree with his style? — Olivier5
For example, "I'm ready for bed" is a statement coming from someone who is ready for bed. Not everyone, when they're ready for bed, asks themselves some question or another which is answered by that statement at that time. Not everyone, when ready for bed, are being asked a question that that statement stands in response to... at that time. — creativesoul
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.