Aim, Methodology and Function

Question 1

Methodology Opening statement

Answer 1

If the aim of philosophy should be to achieve a deeper understanding of philosophical ideas, then this begs the question as to how we can achieve such understanding

Question 2

Why might Reading be good for Philosophy (Anthony Kenny)

Answer 2

A reader is cheated if merely is told the conclusion of a philosopher’s argument without having had the chance to see the methods with which they were achieved.

The notion of examining a philosopher’s argument’s strength by breaking it down to its premises and testing the truth of the flow of its premises and the truth of the premises themselves is effectively analysis and the best way to understand an argument/

Question 3

Why might Reading be better than other forms of doing philosophy?

Answer 3

Depth of understanding: Reading allows for a depth of understanding that other methods, such as listening to lectures or watching videos, may not provide.

Critical thinking: Reading philosophy requires active engagement and critical thinking, as readers must analyze, evaluate, and question the arguments presented

Question 4

Aim

Answer 4

In the greater part of its existence –> Mostly about production of knowledge

• Plato + Socrates –> used philo to gain k from a position of radical doubt
• Aquinas + Anselm –> used to gain k about God
• Descartes attempts to gain k that is “likely to last”

In contrast to my experience of Philosophy

• Theodor Adorono –> Treating philo in the manner above –> turns philo into a robotic manner rather than a humanistic manner
• This is problematic because it would be philo not from an anthropomorphic perspective and would have led to it being a non holistic examination
• This does not mean we cant SEEK new K
• Nevertheless, philosophers like Descartes might argue that is only through mechanistic philosophy that we can achieve production of K

In contrast to my experience writing an IA –> Developed new understanding xyz BUT did not obtain new k

• A potential weakness of this arg –> If we accept Philo as understanding –> philo would not change anything (SEEMS LIKE A STRONG CASE) –> contrary to my own exp
• This seems like a strong case, as surrendering pre-existing values in the name of futhering understanding seems in contrary to the spirit of Descarte’s aim to rid himself of all his previous beliefs.
• However, this is not true!

Question 5

Function

Answer 5

Should have a small scope

Compares well with my experience of doing history and philosophy

The implementation of Philosophy has been sometimes very dangerous –> Mao’s justification for Great Leap Forward –> Philosophical basis –> 50 million dead

However, is this a straw manning the argument of Mill and Bentham which suggests they should go hand in hand (pol + phil) –> Inductive Reasoning

Also, Is it philosophy itself that is to blame for this.

Mill and Bentham –> Human rights developed outside of philosophy

Question 6

Disadvantages of Reading

Answer 6

Misinterpretation

Limited scope

Accessibility –> fluency

Question 7

Counters to Disadvantages of Reading

Answer 7

• Different interpretations can enrich the field of philosophy by leading to a diversity of perspectives and ideas.
• The same philosophical text can be read and interpreted in different ways by different readers, leading to new insights and understandings of the text. This can stimulate further dialogue and discussion within the philosophical community and lead to the development of new theories and approaches.
• Misinterpretation can be minimized by engaging in careful and critical reading practices. This involves closely analyzing the text, considering the historical and cultural context in which it was written, and examining the arguments and evidence presented. By doing so, readers can arrive at a more accurate understanding of the text and avoid misinterpretations.
• Limited scope in reading philosophy is that it’s not necessarily a problem in and of itself. Philosophers may choose to focus their reading on a particular tradition or school of thought because they find it more interesting, relevant, or compelling, and this can lead to a deeper and more nuanced understanding of those ideas.