VCE Stuff > VCE Philosophy
Picking up unit 3/4 Philosophy
Mech:
Just saw this response. And I will respond to it.
--- Quote from: Aurelian on December 04, 2012, 07:53:18 pm ---
To be clear, these guys didn't solely write whole books entirely dedicated to one philosopher; they had their own, well thought out philosophies which they expounded at great length. Where they did do a detailed analysis of other philosophers, they did it within the context of a wider issue, and made significant independent contributions to that issue.
--- End quote ---
Kant said of Hume that it had awoken him from his "dogmatic slumber". I am sure Kant did not have this profound realisation by just reading excerpts of Hume's work. I am also certain he went to great lengths to know the texts he was responding to with his ideas. Exegeses and notes, sleepless nights and what Nietzsche described as the "blurring" of emotion and thought, this intense engagement with ideas as if they were your own emotions -- the dichotomy of thoughts and emotions disappeared for Nietzsche. You must really know the ins and out of an issue which are raised or responded to in particular texts before you have any interesting independent contributions.
You should marvel at the expositions and thought that has went into addressing a problem and not sell it short by just reading the excerpts (maybe just for VCE do the excerpts, but if you have the passion and the urge to get a more informed view you should read the entirety of the text). This inspires you, this gives wind to your philosophical sails so to speak. Philosophy starts out with a resignation to the fact you probably know nothing with certainty (I would even go as far as to agree with Critchley and say that philosophy starts in failure or a misgiving in reality you wish to reconcile). Your want for answers should lead you to seek answers, to want to read that tome of work by Parfit in the hope you will glean something precious to add to your own philosophical tapestry.
Hume was largely inspired and responding to Malebranche, Kant was inspired and responding to Hume. Philosophers beget one another. They did not just sit around having read excerpts of one another's works and then have these great ideas, these profound moments and motivation to write. If this is how philosophy is done nowadays, no wonder we are not seeing any larger works being pushed out the birth canals of philosophy departments (with the exception of Parfit) and just very specialised discussion of certain topics. We never really see the totality that the philosophers of the past provided with their great works. I think this is exactly because people are not prepared or taught to have respect for the texts in entirety or are placed in an environment where a hurried and isolated understanding of a few arguments is acceptable. You should take the time to digest it all, to really know what Kant had to say about X or Y and then challenge it.
So, I meet you halfway. I agree you must sit and do those hours of pondering about key ideas that grab your attention (or what your curriculum tells you must grab your attention), but you must also do the extra hard yards to really sink your teeth into a work of philosophy and read it all. You will probably get to the end of it and feel like you have got a grip of some things and then, suddenly, it will slip from your fingers because you have ruminated about it some more or honed in upon a subsidiary point that the philosopher made. You will then probably feel the need to read more, be nauseated and giddy enough to reach for another book, for your antidote or the answer to this question (which, for the most part, you do not find). Not only that, you will spend hours thinking about it and probably even talking about it with others (if you have the luxury of comrades with a listening, interested ear).
If you just want to treat philosophical texts as just a series of aphorisms (which most are not) that stand alone, I really do think you will not have this wonderful journey. These texts are not adages, they are expositions which probably follow to the logical conclusion. You might as well and sit down and read some works by Marcus Aurelius or Seneca.
--- Quote --- All I'm saying is that a purely text-based approach to philosophy isn't sufficient to be a good philosopher...
--- End quote ---
And yet I never endorsed that. I endorsed reading the texts and getting some context if you are really passionate about philosophy as something to do for the sake of doing it. It was you who misrepresented my views and made it out I was endorsing just sticking to the text and regurgitating it (which, I am sorry to say, is the VCE curriculum for the most part; I dare you to tell a philosophy professor you have a knowledge of the ideas, thought problems and questions (i.e. the issues) raised by Kant, Nietzsche or Hume by just having read the limited excerpts of VCE).
Aurelian:
Lol.
Mech:
--- Quote from: Aurelian on December 05, 2012, 02:46:42 pm ---Lol.
--- End quote ---
You obviously do not share my passion. ::)
Aurelian:
--- Quote from: Mech on December 05, 2012, 02:47:54 pm ---You obviously do not share my passion. ::)
--- End quote ---
You obviously don't know me :P
I can respond to everything you've said if you want (although not right this second, I do have things to do...), but I don't think there's much point; I doubt either of us is going to be capable of changing the opinion of the other that much. I also think we're starting to simply talk past each other at this point...
Mech:
--- Quote from: Aurelian on December 05, 2012, 02:52:15 pm ---
--- Quote from: Mech on December 05, 2012, 02:47:54 pm ---You obviously do not share my passion. ::)
--- End quote ---
You obviously don't know me :P
I can respond to everything you've said if you want (although not right this second, I do have things to do...), but I don't think there's much point; I doubt either of us is going to be capable of changing the opinion of the other that much. I also think we're starting to simply talk past each other at this point...
--- End quote ---
And if you knew me, you would know I, too, take my philosophy seriously (that much should be self-evident). ;)
I think you just jumped to conclusions and it irks me that you did. I cannot really be bothered with a discussion with you if you cannot even give a polite and considered response when someone want to have a discussion with you and not just "lol".
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version