Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

If Philosophy Won’t Diversify, Let’s Call It What It Really Is

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 208 posts

Re: If Philosophy Won’t Diversify, Let’s Call It What It Really Is

#61

Post by Scarblac »

whatshisface wrote: post #9

It feels like the author has missed the point of philosophy entirely. If some Chinese philosophical paper is very good, it should be evaluated on its merits and folded in to an appropriate course for that topic. Philosophers believe at least, that they are doing work more along the lines of mathematics than underwater dance (that is, searching for truth). Nobody would ever dream of arguing against eurocentrism in num…

I clicked around to see which topics were actually taught to undergraduates in the first philosophy program Google showed me (happened to be Yale): http://philosophy.yale.edu/undergraduate-program/undergradua...

The first five:

* An examination of major figures in the history of Western philosophy

* An examination of attempts to reconcile the evils of this world with the existence of a perfectly good God, with special attention to proposed solutions to this problem that appeal to human free will in explaining why God allows evil.

* An introduction to formal logic.

* An introduction to ancient philosophy, beginning with the earliest pre-Socratics, concentrating on Plato and Aristotle, and including a brief foray into Hellenistic philosophy.

* An introduction to major figures in the history of modern philosophy, with critical reading of works by Descartes, Malabranche, Spinoza, Leibniz, Locke, Berkeley, Hume, and Kant.

Of those, only formal logic is neutral. The rest has an obvious bias.

Re: If Philosophy Won’t Diversify, Let’s Call It What It Really Is

#62

Post by danharaj »

programmer1234 wrote: post #36

If you strip away the appeals to emotion, their point seems flimsier in isolation: "Non-European philosophical traditions offer distinctive solutions to problems discussed within European and American philosophy, raise or frame problems not addressed in the American and European tradition, or emphasize and discuss more deeply philosophical problems that are marginalized in Anglo-European philosophy." This is on the s…

Have you just discovered that when you permute the words in a sentence, you can radically change it's meaning?

The point of the article is the primacy of Western philosophical traditions in their departments. The context of the discussion in reality is what makes it relevant. Your permutation is incongruous with the context they're making their argument in.

Re: If Philosophy Won’t Diversify, Let’s Call It What It Really Is

#63

Post by Scarblac »

kolbe wrote: post #38
whack wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The author addresses your exact point in the article. "Others might argue against renaming on the grounds that it is unfair to single out philosophy: We do not have departments of Euro-American Mathematics or Physics. This is nothing but shabby sophistry. Non-European philosophical traditions offer distinctive solutions to problems discussed within European and American philosophy, raise or frame problems not address…

No, the authors acknowledge this counterargument, but they do not offer a substantial refutation of it. They try to confuse their readers by equating a historical examination of philosophy with philosophy itself. id=whatshisface is correctly addressing how this argument applies to philosophy.

History of philosophy is a major part of all philosophy programs, and the list of topics that are discussed in the non-history topics are those that were discussed by the old European philosophers.

Re: If Philosophy Won’t Diversify, Let’s Call It What It Really Is

#64

Post by DanielBMarkham »

This is terrible.

Ye gods, there's a whole section of philosophy devoted to pragmatism, which by it's very definition could care less where stuff came from.

I know that there's no way somebody received an advanced degree in philosophy and is now making a case that the historical roots of one thought system or another is more important than how useful it is. This has to be a troll.

You measure systems, whatever they are, by how well they achieve the goals you have set them up to address. Philosophy, especially, is a field of endeavor where you move between toolsets depending on the situation and context. That's because philosophy is not a science, it's a set of tools.

It's also not a preschool art project, and observing the field from a distance and noting that there's not enough blue, or too many mountains, is the height of reductionist idiocy.

I'm sorry for the vehemence. This article makes me sad. These folks should know better.

I am reminded of the old saying: if you do not know why you are doing something, stop doing it.

Re: If Philosophy Won’t Diversify, Let’s Call It What It Really Is

#65

Post by sageikosa »

Coincoin wrote: post #19
whatshisface wrote: post #9

It feels like the author has missed the point of philosophy entirely. If some Chinese philosophical paper is very good, it should be evaluated on its merits and folded in to an appropriate course for that topic. Philosophers believe at least, that they are doing work more along the lines of mathematics than underwater dance (that is, searching for truth). Nobody would ever dream of arguing against eurocentrism in num…

The author clearly thinks philosophy is some kind of school of esoterism and after life.

What became Philosophy was first delineated by the Hellenic Greeks. It was a pursuit of the literate as an alternative to the waning gods of the masses. There are certainly other schools of thought on what things are, how they should be considered, how being should act, how societies should organize and what people should admire and strive for; but not all of those are philosophical.

Re: If Philosophy Won’t Diversify, Let’s Call It What It Really Is

#66

Post by vixen99 »

vlehto wrote: post #33

They wish to include non-European traditions of philosophy into academic philosophy. "Jay L. Garfield is - - the author of “Engaging Buddhism: Why It Matters to Philosophy.” Bryan W. Van Norden is -- the author of “Introduction to Classical Chinese Philosophy.”" "Give us more money. We like money."

Well, who doesn't float their boat?

Re: If Philosophy Won’t Diversify, Let’s Call It What It Really Is

#67

Post by ikeboy »

danharaj wrote: post #51
tokai wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Nobody would ever dream of arguing against eurocentrism in number theory" You underestimate postmodernist literary theorists.

Quote one that argues the eurocentrism of number theory. Or are postmodernists just a bogeyman?

http://www.amazon.com/Mathematics-Roots-Postmodern-Thought-V...

http://reconstruction.eserver.org/Issues/044/blackwell.htm

Re: If Philosophy Won’t Diversify, Let’s Call It What It Really Is

#68

Post by Scarblac »

krutulis wrote: post #45
CWuestefeld wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is the author perhaps thinking of something more like "history of philosophy"? What you say about philosophy being more like mathematics is true, and as far as I can see, going forward philosophy is just philosophy, and it would be silly to label it with nations and cultures. But looking backwards, the path that brought different cultures to the table, that got them thinking about the nature of things, is quite diffe…

Yes, I agree. The history of philosophy is an important part of philosophy, not all of philosophy. I studied the subject nearly 30 years ago and can only recall the history courses as having a decisive Western bias (though not a monopoly). I believe all the courses were correctly labeled, and I can remember at least one embarrassed explanation that other traditions could not be included. I am curious how the bias mig…

The very idea that something like logic is part of philosophy is Western, I think. The ancient Greek philosophers studied logic, and therefore modern Western philosophers still do. I don't think people with an African or Chinese or whatever background would even consider that a natural part of the subject. They probably would consider other topics that are not included in our philosophy programs.

Re: If Philosophy Won’t Diversify, Let’s Call It What It Really Is

#69

Post by tokai »

danharaj wrote: post #51
tokai wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Nobody would ever dream of arguing against eurocentrism in number theory" You underestimate postmodernist literary theorists.

Quote one that argues the eurocentrism of number theory. Or are postmodernists just a bogeyman?

I cannot give you a quote specifically about number theory. But I would point you towards the discipline of ethnomathematics if such things interests you. The wikipedia article seems alright.[0]

[0](For your convenience) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnomathematics

Post reply on HN