Oh, sorry. Accidentally tagged you. — Garrett Travers
The study of the fundamental nature of knowledge, reality, and existence, especially when considered as an academic discipline. — Garrett Travers
a philosopher is someone who believes truth matters; either, because truth must be understood, or because truth must be obscured, and who constructs arguments to one of these ends! — karl stone
Come now, Smith. What do you mean? What brought you to such a conclusion? — Garrett Travers
I take issue with the idea of a philosopher this statement implies. There are people on this forum who have extensive knowledge of what, usually - a few particular philosophers have said, but who couldn't reason their way out of a paper bag. They are devotees, not philosophers - and if you're not careful, they'll induct you into their cult! — karl stone
The motives of the latter group vary, from intellectual masturbation through to religious protectionism via various political motivations — karl stone
Ha Ha... thanks for the heads up!
If what you say has any element of truth within it then perhaps, over time, I will be less concerned about being able to hold my intellectual ground during dialogue with all comers on this forum. Hopefully, I will also never ossify and always maintain an open mind towards the viewpoints of others. — universeness
I am so going to steal the term 'intellectual masturbation,' I don't seem to have encountered (I refuse to say 'come across it'..oh,...I just did) it before. It is a great descriptor for the smug look I have often viewed on the face of one protagonist when they think they have just scored an intellectual point against another. I think I will be using that term when I see that look in someone's face again. I think its a great counter. I admit to secretly feeling that way myself, when in debate but I have always felt a little ashamed afterward. Or at least, it makes me question my own motivations and priorities when dealing with others around me. — universeness
There's often detectable traces of truth in what I say, and here it's the idea that in-depth knowledge of a philosopher's works can become a prison for the mind. I think that's true. So don't let people browbeat you with appeals to authority. I also believe there are, what I call 'obscurantists' - who, for a variety of reasons, seek to make things as complicated and obscure as possible — karl stone
You seem to have an agile and enquiring mind, but come across as a bit uncertain of yourself. I just wanted you to know, in depth knowledge of philosophy doesn't make you a philosopher. — karl stone
I have no problem regarding myself as a philosopher, as that is my field of study and the school of thought I hope to contribute to — Garrett Travers
Can one study philosophy without becoming a philosopher? Can one engage in philosophical thinking without contributing to a philosophical school of thought? What is the exact moment when one becomes a philosopher? — pfirefry
Of course, you may end up just drawing conclusions drawn by philosophers long ago — Garrett Travers
when ones knowledge, command, skill, or profiency on the subject is able to be utilized by the individual to contribute something new to the field — Garrett Travers
If two people independently drew the same conclusion in the field of philosophy, would only one of them become a philosopher, the one who did it earlier than the other? Or perhaps the one who reached a broader audience? — pfirefry
No, they would both still be philosophers, if they meet the criteria set out in quote two there. It isn't about drawing the same conclusions, or not. What I said earlier was that you can engage with philosophical thought without being a phiosopher, the conclusion drawing bit was just an example of how that could happen. What defines a philosopher is contained in the second of my quotes you provided. Use that as a reference to quote one. — Garrett Travers
Forgive me, I made a false connection between conclusions and contributions. I meant to aks: If two people offer the same contribution to the field, would only one of them contributing something new to the field? — pfirefry
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.