(no subject)
In my Ethics seminar, I often use historical and cultural anthropology to attack arguments and formulate my own positions. For example, when someone recently argued that a "logical moral theory" was "essential" for the moral functioning of a society, I pointed out that most societies (today and throughout history) have had no concept of such logical theories, and it's hard to argue that they haven't functioned morally.
This kind of argument is often greeted with a kind of scorn in academia. This particular prof usually attempts to "steer" us away from such conversations, back towards a discussion of abstract principles and their possible contradictions. It drives me nuts. How can I accept someone positing judeo-christian "goodness" as universal human intuition when simple grade nine anthro shows this to be patently false?
This is an unfortunate attitude I've encountered in a lot of people: a sort of world-fearing retreat into pure rational speculation. Philosophers must NOT allow themselves to ignore discoveries in other disciplines, and if those discoveries directly contradict our elegant rational constructions, it's our duty to scrap them and find new ones. Or, if those who feel themselves to be spokesmen for "what philosophy is" disagree with me, then philosophy can get stuffed.
This kind of argument is often greeted with a kind of scorn in academia. This particular prof usually attempts to "steer" us away from such conversations, back towards a discussion of abstract principles and their possible contradictions. It drives me nuts. How can I accept someone positing judeo-christian "goodness" as universal human intuition when simple grade nine anthro shows this to be patently false?
This is an unfortunate attitude I've encountered in a lot of people: a sort of world-fearing retreat into pure rational speculation. Philosophers must NOT allow themselves to ignore discoveries in other disciplines, and if those discoveries directly contradict our elegant rational constructions, it's our duty to scrap them and find new ones. Or, if those who feel themselves to be spokesmen for "what philosophy is" disagree with me, then philosophy can get stuffed.