Interesting (critical) reflection on my rules thus far
Eric Schliesser has just posted this interesting reflection on my recent blog posts regarding methodology. More discussion welcome! Once I've digested it I will add some thoughts below.
what's your response to his
what's your response to his point about malbranche being a possible missing conceptual link (i think a BBC4 IOT discusses this link too)
In reply to what's your response to his by sdaf
Well, to be honest I don't
Well, to be honest I don't know; beyond the fact that Averroes "Incoherence of the Incoherence" (and hence the original "Incoherence," as part of it) were translated into Latin, I don't know much about the European reception of the work. You can certainly see why Malebranche would have been interested in the section on miracles though!
Hello, I am currently working
Hello, I am currently working on an essay to explain the time and space of human civilization. I will like to share my ideas with you. Thank you.
Add new comment
- Add new comment
- 7168 views
Blog Archive
- September 2017 (2)
- August 2017 (3)
- July 2017 (3)
- June 2017 (1)
- May 2017 (4)
- April 2017 (4)
- February 2017 (5)
- January 2017 (1)
- December 2016 (3)
- September 2016 (4)
- August 2016 (3)
- June 2016 (3)
- May 2016 (1)
- April 2016 (1)
- March 2016 (3)
- February 2016 (1)
- December 2015 (5)
- November 2015 (2)
- October 2015 (2)
- September 2015 (2)
- August 2015 (1)
- July 2015 (1)
- June 2015 (4)
- May 2015 (1)
- April 2015 (4)
- March 2015 (2)
- February 2015 (2)
- January 2015 (2)
- December 2014 (6)
- November 2014 (2)
- October 2014 (6)
- September 2014 (11)
- August 2014 (3)
- July 2014 (1)
- June 2014 (4)
- May 2014 (3)
I think Eric's comments help
I think Eric's comments help to get at the distinctions between what historians of philosophy do and what other historians (like those of medicine/science like myself) do that pop up fairly regularly from HOP people of my acquaintance. I especially like the symmetry principle analogy. Of course it is true that in all types of history anachronistic approaches sometimes provide something useful, but it perhaps more true (or the most true) in the history of philosophy. The historian of science/medicine for example may seek to understand the thoughts of the subject under study in their own context in part because they would be leery of assigning them value in a modern context, but this is less so for philosophers (I think).