Philosophy Buds
What next?
It's often said that philosophy produced the natural sciences.
I read a particularly nice expression of that idea:
"Philosophy is a highly productive and consequential enterprise. An eye cast over the intellectual history of the modern world (from say 1600 CE onwards) would see that in effect philosophy gave birth to natural science in the seventeenth century, to psychology in the eighteenth century, to sociology and linguistics in the nineteenth century while in the twentieth century it played a significant part in the development of cognitive science. No doubt this somewhat simplifies matters, but not by too much, because philosophy is enquiry into important and central concerns that are not yet well understood, certainly not well enough understood to constitute self standing branches of study. When the right questions and the right methods of answering them become apparent the area of enquiry in question can become an independent pursuit. For a major example; as soon as philosophical speculation about the nature and properties of the material universe had identified appropriate methods of asking and answering it's questions in this case by empirical and mathematical means) the enquiry ceased to be philosophy and became natural science."
A C Grayling Ideas That Matter p373 374)This made me smile:-)
Philosophy buds off new studies. It sort of implies that philosophers are folk I can think about things they don't understand and can't understand yet they wonder anyway. And who can't know the answers but are willing to discuss it. And new knowledge has to come from someplace and wondering seems to be a good place to start and discussion a good place to go on to.
But if philosophy buds of new areas of enquiry I'm wondering what's budding now? Here at Thothica the theme has been contemporary philosophy. That's where my own interests have been and I'm not a teacher I like to think. And I am honored to attract many other thinkers who are interested in other areas of philosophy. It's a wonderful way to learn because you are continually challenged from outside your rut. I've seen that sort of thing growing in many situations ranging from internet discussion groups to real life Philosopher's Cafe.
What might that bud into?
Well what if out of that practice grew a series of questions and ways of answering them that showed us how to break up the polarization that sets us at each other's throats?
Another thing I notice is how it's now normal in philosophy to treat meaning as being the output of various sorts of interaction instead of something found in the world. And we're struggling to understand what that means in terms of the old ideas of objectivity and subjectivity and are finding that that process is transforming our ideas of objectivity and subjectivity. We're struggling to really grok how anything can be conscious some have said that that's a problem we can't possibly solve.
But others feel that the right question to ask about that is right on the tip of our collective tongues. And it's a curious thing often when you finally find the right question then the answer is right there. Who know what would bud out of knowing how anything can be conscious. But I must say that Grayling's characterization is to one dimensional. It's all about how philosophy influences but not about how philosophy is influenced.
The growth of the natural sciences has transformed the world within which philosophy is practiced, and it shouldn't be surprising that that changes the meaning of a lot of things. Philosophers have to be influenced by those shifts in meanings. Well actually many philosophers reject that new web of meaning even if it means rejecting the scientific knowledge that caused it.
But others are embracing that project of understanding within the new web of meaning. Because after all if philosophy is the project of trying to deal with questions that we don't know how to answer yet what could be generating philosophic questions more than physics or biology or even cognitive science? So maybe while philosophy buds new sciences new sciences bud new philosophies. Gasp! That's circular! We'll never reach the Omega Point that way :-)
Instead we reach a concept sort of like the multiverse idea philosophy continually uses science to bud new philosophies:-)
What do you think?
I present regular philosophy discussions in a virtual reality called Second Life.
I set a topic and people come as avatars and sit around a virtual table to discuss it.
Each week I write a short essay to set the topic.
I show a selection of them here.