Philosophy in Chains!
.

.

[a mini-history of philosophy]

 For most of the last 25 centuries the philosophical enterprise
had been focused upon finding the right answers to various
sets of difficult questions. And so philosophical competition
consists of comparing one set of answers with other similar
sets to show off the relative strengths and weaknesses of each
particular philosophy in relation to others. In this way of
thinking, then, the best philosophy is the one with the best
set(s) of answers to these most vexing questions. So it was.
.
 But then science comes along offering answers that are vastly
superior (ie. on the practical and empirical level), and
philosophers suddenly find themselves scrambling for cover
as the entire artificial edifice of metaphysics comes crashing
down around their ears! This is merely the logical conclusion
of Descartes' "method of doubt"; but now the external world
is entirely lost to the scientists (who are busy dividing and
distributing the spoils), and the philosophers are forced
indoors to consider the nature of the mind, the nature of
knowledge (ie. in the wake of Science's astonishing successes),
and the nature of philosophy itself within the new world order.
.
 And so it was the French mathematician Rene Descartes who
first steered the starship philosophy away from the bright
stars of the theological-system and toward the more promising
stars of the scientific-system. Thus the quest for certainty
and the best set of answers remains the philosophers' chief
unstated motivators; and this also constitutes the enduring
(and largely unacknowledged) legacy of Descartes. Then David
Hume looks at philosophy's new foundations, and concludes
that science is no more certain than theology. In the end,
both rely heavily upon blind faith.
.
 Later on, Immanuel Kant realizes the danger posed by the very
good Mister Hume, and resolves to rescue science. And he does
succeed (more or less), but at the great cost of sacrificing
metaphysics altogether (ie. *almost* altogether); and in the
process redefining the nature of the philosophical enterprise
as well. But then Hegel begins the slow realization that the
history of philosophy must itself become a relevant factor
in every philosopher's labors.
.
 Hegel says that "the study of the history of philosophy is the
study of philosophy itself." This conclusion follows directly
from the notion that 'existence' (ie. Dasein) is everywhere and
always manifested as 'being-in-time' (In-der-Zeit-Sein). In
establishing this insight, Hegel set the course that subsequent
philosophy was to follow, either by way of those building on
Hegel (eg. Heidegger, Croce, Collingwood, etc) or in reaction
against him (eg. Marx and Sartre).
.
 Now Kierkegaard likewise protested against Hegel and the
Hegelian conception of philosophy as science, and K's dislike
of Hegel has carried over into existentialism in general where
'the great system' is rejected on the basis that it bears no
relation to concrete existence and actual living experience.
On the other hand, Bertrand Russell, who has done much more
than Hegel to remake philosophy in the image of science, also
despises Hegel while at the same time following in his foot-
steps (ie. BR does *both* in the same book, his 'A History
of Western Philosophy').
.
 One other anti-Hegelian worth mentioning here is William
James, whose pragmatic "insistence that truth should make a
difference in our lives, that philosophy is vision, and that
the realm of faith and morals must not be severed from the
realm of epistemology and metaphysics" (Kaufmann, 'Hegel:
Reinterpretation, Texts, and Commentary', 1965, p.288) is
actually far more "Hegelian" than not!
.
 But although Hegel considered his philosophy to be a science,
perhaps even the very essence of science, this was not so,
for he only reintroduced theology and metaphysics under slyly
scientific masks and poses. But the world was not long to be
fooled. Along comes Bertrand Russell, the passionate seeker-
of-certainty, the fearless champion of Reason, who exhausts
himself on logical wizardry, and afterwards comes to realize
that certainty is only an illusion!
.
 In thus catching up with Socrates, the disillusioned warrior
decides that philosophy must be rebuilt from the ground up,
and remade into the image and likeness of science. Thus
philosophy is a specific (but still very broad) field of
inquiry; one distinct from theology on one side, and science
on the other, and consisting of various sub-fields each with
its own specific set or sets of *problems* (which may or
may not be solvable).
.
 So Russell's greatness as a philosopher involves basically
three achievements, all of which advanced the progress of
philosophy. (1) His early work in logic and mathematics.
(2) His work in the history of philosophy. And (3) his
decisive re-orientation and reorganization of philosophy
(ie. its many and various problems). The subject matter of
philosophy can thus be categorized and set forth according
to some scheme along the lines (more or less) as follows:
.
 [1] Logic: formal and material logic; apprehension, judgment,
       universals, probability, validity, etc.
 [2] Epistemology: reflection, knowledge, subject and object,
       truth and falsity, evidence, etc.
 [3] Philosophy of Mathematics: number and continuum, sets
       and categories, symbolic logic, etc.
 [4] Philosophy of Science: concept and method, natural laws,
       evolution, technology, etc.
 [5] Natural philosophy: the philosophy of nature, matter
       and form, motion, space and time, etc.
 [6] Natural theology: participation, creation, proofs of
       God's existence, essence and attributes, Providence,
       revelation, the problem of evil, etc.
 [7] Ethics: moral philosophy, action and habit, virtue and
       vice, law and reason, justice and responsibility, etc.
 [8] Philosophy of the Human Sciences: anthropology,
       psychology, sociology, social and political philosophy,
       social-psychology, etc.
 [9] Philosophy of the Humanities: language, art, history,
       religion, education, etc.
 [10] Psychology: life, soul, cognition, sensation,
         perception, volition, etc.
 [11] Metaphysics: being, beauty, substance, causality,
         wisdom, etc.
 [12] History of Philosophy: ancient philosophy, medieval
         philosophy, modern philosophy, contemporary philosophy,
         and also the philosophy of history.
.
 Although this scheme has many variations - as well as some
minor flaws (eg. no adequate place for hermeneutics and
the philosophy of literature) - the intention here is not
really all that much different from Hegel's; ie. to fit all
knowledge, and all fields of inquiry, into its proper place
in the general scheme of things.
.
 Thus the reader can see from this somewhat artificial sketch
that philosophy has indeed achieved legitimacy within the post-
modern world by accommodating itself wholeheartedly to the
scientific outlook, attitude, and mentality. And it has done
so to such an extent, in fact, that it has become little more
than the 'handmaiden of science'; whereas she was formerly
locked into the role of the 'handmaiden of theology'.
.
 Now I don't mean to disparage this momentous achievement,
since it was a very long time in coming to realization (eg.
even Descartes' writings still testify to this service), for
it is surely *much* better to serve a rational master than an
irrational tyrant! But I have to wonder if maybe the progress
of philosophy ought not to be measured in terms of freedom
from the common and prevalent conceptions, rather than by
the quality of her enslavement to whatever "powers that be"
happen to be currently fashionable ... ???
.
 Is it the very nature of philosophy to always serve
some frightful and foreign master?
.
  - founding member of freedom4philosophy club - textman ;>
x

+
/ Topic >  Philosophy in MORE Chains! /
/ Newsgroup >  alt.philosophy / 13March2003 /
/ Philosophy Forums > General P. > Philosophy in Chains! /
.
>> On March6 cybrwurm wrote: Philosophy in Chains!
>> [a mini-history of philosophy]  <snip remainder>
.
> On March11 Paul replies: In doing a history,
.
 cybrwurm interrupts: Even a mini-history? 
.
> I think you stop too soon by not including positivism
> and logical empiricism.
.
  Oh but these are surely implied within any model of
philosophy fashioned after the mathematical/logical approach.
.
> As Neurath would have it,
.
 Who? And he would have it where?
.
> all the masters should be revised into being objects for
> observation and clarification.
.
 If this means that the best philosophical literature requires
prolonged study *and* interpreters who can provide useful and
helpful commentaries for the benefit of the general reader ...
*then* I quite agree with your mysterious mister Neurath. 
.
> Philosophy cannot create anything new for them,
.
 The philosophical literature is what it is; thus the
treasury of resources is fixed and cannot be altered
in any radical way. Gotcha.
.
> it can only aid in clarifying what already exists in them.
.
 So let me get this straight. You're proposing that the
meaning and purpose and goal of philosophy is to provide
commentary upon some arbitrary canon of philosophical
literature? I think you (or Neurath) lost me somewhere.
.
> He, and others like for example Wittgenstein in the
> Tractatus, would have philosophy not creating anything new.
.
 An obvious case of chronic constipation of the imagination.
.
> Wittgenstein said something to the effect of philosophy not
> resulting in any philosophical propositions, but only in the
> clarification of existing propositions.
.
 But surely this is a pointless and arbitrary separation
of things (for the sake of conceptual clarity?), where in
reality no such separation does (or can) exist.
.
> Thus philosophy is tool,
.
 Philosophy can indeed be reduced to the level of mere
linguistic utility - if one were somehow inclined to do such
an absurd and frightful thing - but this only ignores the fact
that the reason philosophy is such a useful tool in the first
place is because it emerges from the prior and primordial
reality of philosophy as *vision* and *awe*.
.
 Oh hey. Wait a minute, I have an idea. Let's clarify the
history of philosophy. Okay, the first thing we have to do is
to destroy the life and nature of philosophy altogether. Done!
Right, now we can proceed ...
.
 No, Paul. It just doesn't work for me, I'm afraid.
.
> an observation and clarification device which can be
> pointed in various directions.
.
Because perception is intentional. Because mind and spirit and
will are intentional. And therefore philosophy is "directed-
vision". You see what I mean about the tool-makers reliance
upon unacknowledged prior assumptions and universal realities?
.
> Where it goes wrong is only where it claims to be doing
> its own work, they'd say.
.
 right 
.
> So anyhow, in this way philosophy couldn't be called a
> slave of anything any more than a magnifying glass could
> be called a slave of what's under it.
.
 Oh, I wouldn't go quite that far. One could always say that
philosophy is now the slave of those who have remade philosophy
into a logico-linguistic tool, an analytic lens, a diagnostic
device. Yes, these ultra-rationalistic tool-makers have made a
great accomplishment for themselves, have they not? First they
provide a golden-shower upon all the philosophers *and* upon
all that they have written, and *then* they pride themselves
upon being their only legitimate offspring!
.
 Good grief!
.
> Certainly we should make an effort to put the magnifying
> glass over something worthwhile instead of over something
> we don't care about,
.
 Hear hear!
.
> but to call the magnifying glass a slave (except maybe
> a slave of us, as we move it) seems wrong.
.
 Not at all, Paul. Those who reduce philosophy to its most
basic utilitarian values are certainly doing no wonderful
service to Our Good Lady Wisdom. Indeed, some could even accuse
them of being traitors to philosophy; and who could possibly
disprove them, eh? In sum then, if we put lady-philosophy into
the most vile and degrading bondage, and if we then choke her
vitality and leave her lifeless, then I'd say that we are more
than justified in pointing out that this poor lady is still a
slave, more wretched even than ever before! 
.
    - one who mourns Her dismal condition - cybrwurm ;>
.
P.S. "Justice will convict the fashioners and
         witnesses of falsehoods" (Heraclitus).
x

+
    Freedom the Goal & the Method!
.
> darkcrow wrote: <snip> Is it not mans destiny
> to be steeped in perpetual illusion?
.
 cw: Certainly NOT! It is man's destiny to free himself
from illusion (whether perpetual or not). Hence the
meaning of the philosophical enterprise as a whole ...
.
P.S. "If you will not believe, surely you shall not
be established!" -- Isaiah 7:9
x