Dmb On 2/25/10 8:35 AM, "david buchanan" <[email protected]> wrote:
> I mean, the idea that philosophy remains steeped in SOM simply isn't true. I think philosopher Nicholas Maxwell might disagree with you. First by asking which "philosophy" are you referring to. It seem now that every branch of "science" or "academia" has a philosophy all of its own. Then philosophy pursued as an individual discipline also specializes in sub fields and schools of thought. He would say that if you are talking about mainstream "philosophy of knowledge" and " philosophy of science" your claim is false. > Rejecting it is a real option that real people take. But he is one of those people. In the 2nd edition of "From Knowledge to Wisdom-A Revolution for Science and the Humanities" he argues that narrow standard version of empiricism which so dominates science is so SOM steeped as to be irrational. It's a long, detailed,and complicated argument but you may want to check it out. http://www.nick-maxwell.demon.co.uk/ His basic thrust is that value needs to be an integral part of empiricism. Dave Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
