Hi dmb, On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 6:27 PM, david buchanan <[email protected]> wrote: >
> > dmb says: > Right, I just following Matt's use of terms and wasn't thinking of the > scientific discipline known as psychology so much as the temperamental, > emotional, personal motives. (Although James did help to found the > discipline.) The idea could be expressed just as well without the term. We > could say that our philosophies are motivated by our biographies, for > example. We could simply say philosophy is a matter of taste. In each case, > the result is an admission that feelings and motives play a role in which > philosophical visions attract or repel us. That's the main point, I think; > that philosophy is and should be a personal, human thing. > [Mark] The justifications for the existence of philosophy, come AFTER the philosophizing, not before. We cannot put the cart before the horse. Philosophy is created by human will. What it points to is the creative nature of the human spirit. We live philosophy which is creativity. We "want" to do something rather than nothing. When you bring in the psychological concepts of feelings and motives, you are straying from philosophy and really discussing psychology, not philosophy. This seems more like the psychology of philosophy. I could just as easily say that that philosophical visions play a role in feelings and motives. The question is, which do you put as the primary endeavor? Do we explain philosophy in terms of psychology or psychology in terms of philosophy? Which one is more important to you? It would seem that you are trending towards the discipline of psychology. There is no need to reduce philosophy using psychological terms. This method of encapsulating philosophy denies the whole purpose of philosophy. James was a product of his time, and he truly believed that a new vocabulary (that of psychology) would help the discipline of philosophy. The problem is that psychology took on a life of its own, and now philosophy is being discussed in psychological terms rather than the other way around. We denigrate philosophy by confining it to some behavioral apparition that does not exist except in a psychologist's office. Once philosophy is relegated to behavioral psychology all is lost and determinism steps in to take over. > > > > 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/md/archives.html 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/md/archives.html
