On Jan 18, 12:08 pm, Justintruth <[email protected]> wrote: > Consider adding Husserl and Aquinas
I certainly considered adding Husserl, especially since he started as a mathematician, but something I read somewhere, a year or so ago, suggested that I would not really find him at all congenial. I'm sorry I cannot remember the details, but it was an article comparing and contrasting his version of phenomenology with someone else's, possibly Merleau-Ponty (but again I'm not sure), and although I'm unfamiliar with the field, I formed a definite impression that the argument went in favour of the other guy, from my point of view. I also skimmed through a book called /Numbers in Presence and Absence: A Study of Husserl's Philosophy of Mathematics/, by J. Philip Miller (this was a good few years ago, but I have some notes somewhere), and again didn't form a favourable impression of H's way of thinking. I know he's a founding father, and all that, bu FWIW my impression is that I would prefer to know about how the field moved on after he founded it (if that is possible). Aquinas, of course, is bound to come up in any list of great philosophers, but I just don't happen to know anything about him that would give me any impression, favourable or unfavourable, that I can latch onto (apart from my bias against Christians).
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" 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/minds-eye?hl=en.
