- #1
kldickson
- 106
- 0
The discussion of philosophical questions can be a difficult one, from delineating terms to trying to understand the other person's worldview and taking into account the fact that we are humans who possesses rather limited perception.
There is much criticism of philosophy as a whole; I'd like to use this thread as a forum for discussion on, well, philosophical discussion.
What are your thoughts on the problems permeating the exchange of ideas between philosophers as opposed to the ideas themselves, which have no shortage of deserved criticism?
From my standpoint, there seems to be a lot of lack of consideration of human limits and a lack of defining terms; much discussion I've seen is full of misunderstanding of terms and logical fallacies and a lack of reaching out to, say, other parties who are relevant to a discussion (for example, someone who philosophizes about, say, physics may not reach out to physicists themselves - and if they don't reach out to physicists, quite frankly, in my opinion, that particular philosopher is a moron).
There is much criticism of philosophy as a whole; I'd like to use this thread as a forum for discussion on, well, philosophical discussion.
What are your thoughts on the problems permeating the exchange of ideas between philosophers as opposed to the ideas themselves, which have no shortage of deserved criticism?
From my standpoint, there seems to be a lot of lack of consideration of human limits and a lack of defining terms; much discussion I've seen is full of misunderstanding of terms and logical fallacies and a lack of reaching out to, say, other parties who are relevant to a discussion (for example, someone who philosophizes about, say, physics may not reach out to physicists themselves - and if they don't reach out to physicists, quite frankly, in my opinion, that particular philosopher is a moron).