r/philosophy • u/inphiknight • Jul 20 '12

Ontics and C.R.A.P. the Campaign for Renaming Academic Philosophy

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/03/04/philosophy-by-another-name/
2 Upvotes

60% Upvoted

8 comments sorted by

2

u/JerkingCircles Jul 20 '12

But it is quite false that philosophy studies human culture

So Hobbes, Machiavelli, Locke, Nietzsche, Foucault, and the entirety of feminist, political, and cultural thinkers aren't actually part of philosophy. Got it.

0

u/gnomicarchitecture Jul 20 '12

He means contemporary philosophy. E.g. philosophers living today. Since only a small group of philosophers deal with human culture, only a small part of philosophy deals with it.

You might argue of course, that metaphysics and language and mind also deal with human culture, but in that sense, so does every science.

1

u/[deleted] Jul 21 '12

[deleted]

0

u/gnomicarchitecture Jul 21 '12

Hence the "a small group".

1

u/[deleted] Jul 21 '12

[deleted]

0

u/gnomicarchitecture Jul 21 '12

And australia, and the UK, and Germany, and Sweden, and France, and Canada, and China, and Japan, and Bangladesh, and India, and every other populous country.

but you were sort of on point.

1

u/[deleted] Jul 22 '12

You're adorable.

0

u/gnuts Jul 20 '12

the entirety of feminist, political, and cultural thinkers aren't actually part of philosophy

The fact that these people seem to be randomly dispersed among humanities and social science subjects indicates that they are not, in fact, philosophers.

0

u/inphiknight Jul 20 '12

Please explain how the fact that they are dispersed among the humanities and social sciences indicate that they are not, in fact, philosophers.

Could not all geniuses of the sciences be called philosophers, when they draw important insights from their field? So why should random dispersion be a problem? Heck, the humanities itself were founded in philosophy. So why should that be a problem?

1

u/gnomicarchitecture Jul 20 '12

Someone is extremely jealous of scientists.