[Wittrs] Re: What constitutes "Analytic Philosophy"?
- From: "iro3isdx" <xznwrjnk-evca@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: wittrsamr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2011 04:02:55 -0000
--- In Wittrs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, John Phillip DeMouy <wittrsamr@...>
wrote:
> And what reasons have you for defining it as you do?
I'll follow your new group for a while, as a lurker. But I will hold
off on deciding whether to join.
As for the question on "Analytic Philosophy" - it's really not up to me
to say. I am not a real philosopher (except in the sense that everybody
philosophizes). I'm more a mathematician and scientist.
I sometimes see analytic philosophy as a kind of quasi-religion which,
like all religions, pays too much attention to tradition. And it has
made logic its liturgy.
It seems to me that analytic philosophers are bright people, but that
there is some serious silliness in some of what they do. I'm not an
expert on Wittgenstein, but I did appreciate his recognition of some of
the problems with the ways that philosophy addresses questions.
I became involved with philosophy when I noticed that philosophers are
tending to dominate Cognitive Science. And, in my opinion, they have
been leading CogSci on a wild goose chase.
Regards,
Neil
Other related posts:
