The PhilPapers forums are now closed to new posts but remain available for viewing. The forums are replaced by the PhilPeople news feed and discussion groups.

Philosophy, Misc

 1 - 15 / 15 

Philosophy of Knowledge:In Relation to Truth, Knowledge and Metaphysics. 

In contemporary idealism, especially those of Kantian inspiration, knowledge is considered as the primary and radical philosophical discipline. According to them: “metaphysics itself must be submitted to the previous judgement of the theory of knowledge, which would determine whether it is viable or not.”[1] This sentence could be summarized into this phrase: How can the theory of knowledge leads us to truth? On the other hand, how can we know that it is true?

According to a Kantian metaphor: “reason stands accused before the tribunal in which reason itself is to be the judge.”[2] So if our capacity to reason to reach truth is in question, how will we ever be able to resolve this dilemma?

In a few decades, there have been many philosophers rejecting knowledge, and considered it as a “dead letter.”[3] Heidegger, was one of them who criticized the philosophy of consciousness, where he denounced the substitution of cer ... (read more)

Latest replies: Permanent link: Reply

Some of the entries have already been found to be flawed. For example, Tarski’s expression ‘materially adequate’ was misinterpreted in at least one article and it was misused in another where ‘materially correct’ should have been used. This “session” provides an opportunity to bring more flaws to light.


Acknowledgements: Each of these entries was presented at meetings of The Buffalo Logic Dictionary Project sponsored by The Buffalo Logic Colloquium. The members of the colloquium read drafts before the meetings and were generous with corrections, objections, and suggestions. Usually one 90-minute meeting was devoted to one entry although in some cases, for example, “axiomatic method”, took more than one meeting. Moreover, about half of the entries are rewrites of similarly named entries in the 1995 first edition.


The writing describes a new sort of individual, “a delude”. People like Hitler would well fit the description. He was mentally healthy, however overwhelmed by grossly deluded opinions.

Here is the description from the text: 

"Even when a person is born possessing a healthy mental state, the familial and environmental assault during childhood with deluded opinions and behavior can be the basis for an individual to develop into a delude, an individual in a deluded mental state. In this writing, the label fool, or imbecile, is sometimes interchangeable with the underlying primary conditions of the delude. A fool is predisposed to accept deluded opinions as true; however, he or she can have an overall good awareness of social norms and laws that he or she learned to comply with. A fool is not, because of his mental condition alone, a villain. In contrast, the delude typically develops overwhelming extreme views. These views can be held as more important than any social or legal consideration ... (read more)

Latest replies: Permanent link: Reply

Are any of you aware of any attempt by a contemporary professional philosopher to articulate a practical and self-contained "philosophy of life", akin to those of the ancient Greek philosophical schools?  
To give you an idea of that for which I am searching, please see my own attempt at the following link:

In the interest of full disclosure, please note that I am self-taught in philosophy (if it is not already obvious from a cursory review of my document).

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Latest replies:
  • Kevin Harris, 2014-03-23 : Though I do not personally agree with several of your philosophical positions I am willing to accept them as premises in... (read more)
  • Philo Sofer, 2014-03-31 : Kevin, thank you for reading and comme I agree that substantial benefits may accrue from holding philosophical positions... (read more)
Permanent link: Reply

I'm putting together a list of worthwhile discussions of the question 'What is philosophy?' What should be on it? In particular I'm interested in the question of what sort of subject matter various parts of the field have in common, if any.
Latest replies: Permanent link: Reply

How did philosophy help science throughout the history of science (especially modern science)? As far as I know many assumptions of the modern scientists are actually theories once developed by great philosophers.Can anybody specify some of those assumptions?
Latest replies: Permanent link: Reply

Since 1976, a growing body of work has argued that we urgently need to bring about a revolution in academic inquiry so that the basic aim becomes wisdom and not just knowledge - wisdom being the capacity to realize what is of value in life, for oneself and others, wisdom thus including knowledge, understanding and technological know-how, but much else besides.  What we have at present, academic inquiry devoted, in the first instance, to the pursuit of knowledge is, it is argued, profoundly and damagingly irrational.  The generation of our current global problems, and our current incapacity to tackle them intelligently, effectively and humanely, is in part due to the long-standing structural irrationality of our institutions of learning.

The revolution we require would change every branch and aspect of academic inquiry. A basic intellectual task of academic inquiry would be to articulate our problems of living (personal, social and global) and propose and critically assess possible so ... (read more)
Latest replies: Permanent link: Reply

I'm looking for an accessible and lively intro to Environmental Philosophy (not Environmental Ethics, as we cover that in a separate module). The text should basically address different conceptions of nature, and their relation to overall philosophies and worldviews in different (mainly philosophical) traditions.
Thanks in advance for any help.

What DSM seems to show is that sensation is non epistemic and that perception is a cognitive process. The sensory as non-epistemic, merely bare,
non-conscious occurrences, represent nothing until some perceiving, useful
or mistaken, has gone on.


Are any of you interested in an "open source" philosophical project something rather like the <Bourbaki Group>, but initially limited to describing and mapping important philosophical problems and their inter-relations? As a first approximation, the guidelines might be as follows.

1.) Initially, at least, "philosophy" would include whatever serious thinkers who call themselves "philosophers" have said or implied it is. (Obviously, this would be an incoherent mix, including views that reject the possibly of philosophy. )

2.) Similarly, anything (including differences about what philosophy is and whether it is possible) would count as a philosophical "problem" if any such persons thinks (has thought) it is. Of course, something would still count as a important "problem" even if it is thought by some to have been solved or not to be a legitimate problem at all.

3.) The project would be descriptive and analytic, not evaluative or historical.

4.) The idea of would be:(a) to collect a (presumab ... (read more)
Latest replies: Permanent link: Reply


In this paper I described three fundamentally different kinds of classes; but the idea of ‘natural kinds’ never crossed my mind.  (That shows how long ago it was.)
I guess I now should say something like, “The extension of a ‘natural kind’ K is governed by the (usually hidden) features that are responsible for such and such observable distinguishing features in these (pointing) paradigmatic Ks.”

That would give us an important, and interesting fourth kind of class. Right?

Thinking back on the history of philosophy, I started to wonder what the field has actually achieved. Now, of course, philosophy has informed (and continues to do so!) almost every other discipline, but I'm thinking of achievement in a rather strict sense. What major philosophical disputes have been solved in such a way that all mainstream philosophers agree on their solution? What are the main problems whose solutions have been accepted by philosophers in the same way that specialists would agree on a solution in their particular field? If there aren't any such solutions, what does this tell us about philosophy?


Latest replies: Permanent link: Reply


The lead article in the issue of IJDE containing this essay is the official Vatican translation of the now famous Regensburg University address by Pope Benedict XVI. Although there are conflicts between the two articles, neither author had previously seen the other's work. 

 1 - 15 / 15