Quote:
Originally Posted by WT Sharpe
I think many (but not all) who engage in philosophy professionally, especially since Wittgenstein, have shied away from the big questions, including what constitutes the good life, and how do we find meaning in our existence. Too many modern philosophers strike me as people who would be more at home teaching language skills.
|
Yeah, I blame the Brits and Americans for what Rorty called the linguistic turn of the 20th century. The original idea in empiricism was that if we could figure out how our ideas correspond to reality, then we'd figure out how to distinguish knowledge from mere opinion. Of course that didn't work out so the anglo-american tradition has been reliving that failure now through the notions of proposition and reference. Seriousl analytic philosophy is now merely the conceptual handmaiden of the natural sciences.
Nevertheless, as an ahistorical practice mutilated by self-imposed division of labor, it can recycle the same basic arguments over and over again every generation which, in turn, ensures that everyone can get tenure and promotion!
The way out of all this is to go back to Ralph Waldo Emerson's critique of the self image of the philosopher and work your way forward but, since Emerson is no longer counted as a philosopher, we will have to pin our hopes on his grumpy students, Nietzsche and Dewey.
