Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Classicism vs humanism

Expand Messages
  • prometeus57
    ... Is it really? Your description of Cartesian philosophy makes me doubt it. Contemporary philosophy is nothing like mathematics, even as it was practiced two
    Message 1 of 3 , Jun 24, 2002
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In carfree_cities@y..., "J.H. Crawford" <mailbox@c...> wrote:
      > Now, the Cartesians never succeeded in identifying such a point,
      > but our contemporary philosophy remains mostly based on Cartesian
      > philosophy. (Please, if you know what book this is, tell me!)

      Is it really? Your description of Cartesian philosophy makes me doubt
      it. Contemporary philosophy is nothing like mathematics, even as it
      was practiced two millenia ago. If anything, what's notable about
      contemporary philosophy is how verbiose it is, how useless, how error-
      prone, how flawed. Actually, that does sound like Descartes; his
      writings being all too often complete and obvious nonsense.

      > Another point is that Cartesian thought is itself non-rational,
      > being based as it is on a religious revelation to Des Cartes that
      > this was the correct method of thought. The very foundations of our
      > philosophy are thus religious mush - there's nothing really
      > scientific about it after all.

      I realize it's fun to bash philosophers but this is one area where
      contemporary philosophy *radically differs* from Cartesian. There is
      no room for either divinity or revelation in modern philosophy. In
      fact, if you refer to Descartes' method in the specific (as you must
      since you refer to specific flaws) then your accusation that
      contemporary philosophy is founded on his methods is completely false.
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.