philosophy; you will need to start doing it – clarifying meanings,
drawing distinctions, and evaluating and constructing arguments. And
the best way to do this is in debate with fellow students and tutors.
(Philosophy has always had a social dimension; the ancient Greek
philosophers used to discuss their ideas while strolling in the public
buildings of Athens.) Some people find this daunting, and get upset
when their views are criticized, but you should look at it as an
opportunity to develop your ideas and hone your philosophical skills.
By raising objections to your views, other people will help you to
improve your arguments and make your position clearer and stronger.
And if it is all done in the right spirit (as it usually is), it can
be great fun too! On A211 the main opportunity for discussion will
come at tutorials, where you will meet your tutor and fellow students
from your region. Tutorial groups are small and friendly, and the
atmosphere is very supportive. Do try to attend them if you can, and
be prepared to speak up and get involved. The value of tutorials
stretches well beyond the two hours you spend in the seminar room.
After you leave, you will find yourself thinking about what you said,
how it was received, how you might have said it better, or even how,
on reflection, the thought behind what you said was mistaken. This is
all part of learning to become a philosopher. You will also have an
opportunity to debate with fellow students online.» --
http://openlearn.open.ac.uk/mod/resource/view.php?id=170263
Well, when I went over to OU's philosophy department, I learned that
most of the people employed there tend to work from home. I was,
frankly, disappointed. Maybe working from home is the new 'social
dimension' -- and instead of peripatetic philosophers, we now have
netizen-philosphers. I suppose I shouldn't complain -- that's
evolution (and I'm 1%-4% Neanderthal...
http://www.economist.com/science-technology/displaystory.cfm?story_id=16056349).
There's a guide to philosophy on the internet here --
«Limited to major philosophers, i.e. omitting "professors with home
pages" as far as possible.» --
http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/gpi/philo.htm
all a bit disappointing -- isn't that what Pirsig calls
"philosophology"? Which is not to say that "philosophology" can't be
"done right" (but on that note, the three links to pages about Deleuze
mentioned in that guide were 404 not found -- pfff!).
Elsewhere I found mention of a book (out of print) called "The ends of
philosophy: an essay in the sociology of philosophy and rationality"
by Harry Redner -- well, that sounds good to me. Lately I'm thinking
that we're just about "thought out" -- all the good ideas have been
conceived of already (at least for the moment) and what we need now is
a phase of implementation. OK, maybe that's just me speaking
personally. But gosh, maybe I have a point...
What if the true ends of philosophy are not "clarifying meanings,
drawing distinctions, and evaluating and constructing arguments" and
are instead things like, you know, human happiness and so on? I
suspect I sound a bit like a Freemason, but, again, maybe there's
nothing really wrong with that; I guess the only problem is all this
talking (a little less conversation, a little more action, please).
Still, you might think that this step of "putting philosophy into
action" would be a bit more popular, and I would not feel so all
alone...
These days it seems to me that we have "actionists" (who may not
concern themselves so much with ideas -- implement first, ask
questions later), and "ideaists" (who like to talk, chill, distill --
let's not be too hasty). Hm... now I've found this:
http://www.actionphilosophers.com -- that's exactly the idea. (And
golly, I always wanted to make a book like that...)
Maybe I'll stop here while I have something optimistic to think about.
0 comments:
Post a Comment