Hume eventually said one might as well be a philosopher as anything
else - meaning it as a way of life amongst many.  Philosophers do turn
to practical matters and philosophising is part of social and science
activity.  The immense precision of some science, including the
recognition we are still aproximating in setting quantitative
'devices' (the Ludwig and Snell programmes) relies in part on
philosophical-logical methods.  None of this helps get rid of Mugabe
very directly.  I'm always genuinely impressed by good thinking, if
sometimes a little jealous of it.  The books and papers have not
translated well into action, but as Chaz says (and does in his own
posts) there is some relief and importance to be gleaned.  I once felt
we had the ideas and needed to get them into practically significant
action - believing there was an application methodology perhaps.  I am
now more inclined to the view that we have serious pathology to
confront in communicative action - actually a very old story.  Some
kind of use of history-philosophy as Chaz has often presented is the
beginning of an answer.  I suspect we are trapped by the ease with
which lies and forgetting make our politics simple - yet surely
philosophy that is so complex none of us can understand much of it
cannot provide a democratic base?  What philosophy can do is promote
ideas of what we could do socially.  The ideas of Donaldson, Habermas,
Rawls and others all suggest the establishment of a tolerant,
communicative space for governance - we might add Foucault and Rose in
stressing this may only produce a govern-mentality of docile bodies -
perhaps village-idiot rule through an elite without integrity?
Philosophers have often been court-jesters.

On 6 Nov, 16:31, "Strich.9" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Oct 31, 7:52 am, Greg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> frameworks of everyday life permutations, adding value to humanity.
>
>
>
> > A Call for practical philosophy
>
> There is work, and there is play.  Which is more important?  It
> depends.
>
> There is practical science, and there is philosophy?  Which is more
> important?  It depends.
>
> It depends on what your view on life is, what your situation on life
> is, and how much cognitive horsepower you were endowed with, among
> others.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Epistemology" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to