No...? Erin ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert Paul" <Robert.Paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Sent: Saturday, October 02, 2004 10:57 PM Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: The hilarity of Fichte > "But suppose that it could be shown that, in the wake of all previous > experience, the field which remains available for scientific cultivation is > already occupied by the appropriate sciences and that there appears to be > only one uncultivated plot remaining, namely, the one marked out for the > science of science as such. An suppose, furthermore, that under a familiar > name ("philosophy") one discovers the idea of a science, that is, the idea > of something which wishes to be or to become a science, but which cannot > decide where it should take root. In this case it would not be improper to > direct it toward the empty plot we have discovered. It is immaterial > whether or not people have always meant precisely this by the word > "philosophy". Afterward, this science (if philosophy ever becomes a > science) will be justified in casting off a few names which it has > previously assume out of a (a by no means exaggerated) modesty: the names > "esoteric amusement," "hobby,", and "diletantism." The nation [and this is > the best part] which discovered this science would deserve to give it a name > in its own language, in which case it could be called simply "science" or > [...]" > -------------------------------------- > Have you read Luck Jim? > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, > digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html > ------------------------------------------------------------------ To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html