Metaphilosophy: Difference between revisions
better-wikify quotes; nice additions Philogo |
|||
| Line 57: | Line 57: | ||
==The methods of philosophy== |
==The methods of philosophy== |
||
{{main|Philosophical method}} |
{{main|Philosophical method}} |
||
| ⚫ | |||
| ⚫ | {{cquote|The right method of philosophy would be this. To say nothing except what can be said, i.e. the propositions of natural science, i.e. something that has nothing to do with philosophy: and then always, when someone wished to say something metaphysical, to demonstrate to him that he had given no meaning to certain signs in his propositions. This method would be unsatisfying to the other – he would not have the feeling that we were teaching him philosophy – but it would be the only strictly correct method.}} |
||
Most sources agree that the chief method of philosophy is logical<ref name="ptb" />, rational<ref name="pdp">''Penguin Dictionary of Philosophy''</ref>, critical<ref name="ced" /> enquiry and argument "of a more or less systematic kind."<ref name="ocp" /> [[Thomism|Thomistic]] philosophers refer similarly to the "natural light of reason".<ref name="mtp" /> |
Most sources agree that the chief method of philosophy is logical<ref name="ptb" />, rational<ref name="pdp">''Penguin Dictionary of Philosophy''</ref>, critical<ref name="ced" /> enquiry and argument "of a more or less systematic kind."<ref name="ocp" /> [[Thomism|Thomistic]] philosophers refer similarly to the "natural light of reason".<ref name="mtp" /> |
||
| Line 65: | Line 68: | ||
* the philosopher as critic: investigates the a priori conditions on which e.g. knowledge can exist; Immanuel Kant. |
* the philosopher as critic: investigates the a priori conditions on which e.g. knowledge can exist; Immanuel Kant. |
||
| ⚫ | |||
| ⚫ | {{cquote|The right method of philosophy would be this. To say nothing except what can be said, i.e. the propositions of natural science, i.e. something that has nothing to do with philosophy: and then always, when someone wished to say something metaphysical, to demonstrate to him that he had given no meaning to certain signs in his propositions. This method would be unsatisfying to the other – he would not have the feeling that we were teaching him philosophy – but it would be the only strictly correct method.}} |
||
===Historical methods=== |
===Historical methods=== |
||
Revision as of 21:11, 6 February 2009
Metaphilosophy (from Greek meta μετά = "after", "beyond", "with", "adjacent", "self" + philosophía φιλοσοφία = "love of wisdom") is the study of the nature, aims and methods of philosophy. This article sets out the mains views on these matters.
The nature of philosophy
We may note one peculiar feature of philosophy. If someone asks the question what is mathematics, we can give him a dictionary definition, let us say the science of number, for the sake of argument. As far as it goes this is an uncontroversial statement... Definitions may be given in this way of any field where a body of definite knowledge exists. But philosophy cannot be so defined. Any definition is controversial and already embodies a philosophic attitude. The only way to find out what philosophy is, is to do philosophy.
— Bertrand Russell, The Wisdom of the West, p.7
The use and meaning of the word "philosophy" has changed throughout history: in Antiquity it encompassed almost any inquiry; for Descartes it was supposed to be the Queen of the Sciences, a sort of ultimate justification; in the time of David Hume "metaphysics" and "morals" could be roughly translated as the human sciences; and contemporary analytic philosophy likes to define itself roughly as inquiry into concepts.
Some authors say that philosophy is fundamentally about critical thinking[1], examining the beliefs we take for granted.[2] Wilfrid Hodges wrote:
In English-speaking philosophy (and much European philosophy too) you are taught not to take anything on trust, particularly if it seems obvious and undeniable".[3]
Some authors say that that philosophical enquiry is second-order, having concepts, theories and presupposition as its subject matter. It is "thinking about thinking", of a "generally second-order character".[1] Philosophers study, rather than use, the concepts that structure our thinking. However, the Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy warns that "the borderline between such 'second-order' reflection, and ways of practising the first-order discipline itself, is not always clear: philosophical problems may be tamed by the advance of a discipline, and the conduct of a discipline may be swayed by philosophical reflection".[4]
Definition
The word philosophy is of Ancient Greek origin: φιλοσοφία (philosophía), meaning "love of wisdom."[5][6][7] However, few sources[8] give "love of wisdom" as a possible meaning of the term, and others[2] say the etymology is "not much help".
Many definitions of philosophy begin by stating the difficulty of defining the subject, calling it "notoriously difficult"[2], saying that there is "no straightforward definition"[9] and that most interesting definitions of philosophy are controversial[1]. However, a review of standard reference works [8] [3] [10] [11] [12] [4] [13] [14] suggests that there is a broad agreement among such sources that philosophy involves the study of fundamental or general topics; e.g. "the most fundamental and general concepts and principles involved in thought, action and reality",[15] "the most general questions about our universe and our place in it",[8] the "absolutely fundamental reason of everything it investigates", or "the fundamental reasons or causes of all things".[12] The Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy says it is the investigation of the most general and abstract features of the world and the categories with which we think, in order to "lay bare their foundations and presuppositions".[4]
Demarcation
Some authors say that philosophy is distinct from both empirical science and religion. It differs from science in that its questions cannot be answered empirically, i.e. by observation or experiment; and it differs from religion in that it allows no place for faith or revelation.[8] Philosophy does not try to answer questions by appeal to revelation, myth or religious knowledge of any kind, but uses reason, "without reference to sensible observation and experiments".[12]
Some analytical philosophers argue that all meaningful empirical questions are to be answered by science, not philosophy. However, some schools of contemporary philosophy such as the pragmatists and naturalistic epistemologists argue that philosophy should be linked to science and should be scientific in the broad sense of that term, "preferring to see philosophical reflection as continuous with the best practice of any field of intellectual enquiry"[4].
Taxonomy
One task of metaphilosophy is to provide a taxonomy of philosophical subjects. While such taxonomies vary between sources, the traditional branches of philosophy usually include metaphysics[8][1][12][10][11] (including ontology and cosmology[12]), ethics[1][12][11][10], epistemology[10][12][1][11], logic[8][10], and aesthetics[11]. Other common branches of philosophy include philosophy of mind[12], philosophy of language, philosophy of science, and political philosophy[11].
Applied philosophy, the philosophical critique of various social activities (such as religion) and intellectual pursuits (such as science and sociology), is a more recent addition to philosophy. Philosopher and encyclopedist Mortimer Adler includes all such second-order questions about various fields of study, which are often found under various branches of philosophy beginning with the phrase "philosophy of....", in his taxonomy.[16] Adler divides these second-order philosophical problems into two branches: one addressing the objects of thought, such as Being, Cause, Change, Infinity, Destiny, and Love; the other addressing the subjects, or procedural domains, of thought, e.g. philosophy of religion, philosophy of history, philosophy of language, philosophy of science. Metaphilosophy also attempts to understand such second-order problems with the aid of the other major branches, e.g. metaphysical knowledge in religion, epistemology in religion, axiology in religion, etc.
The aims of philosophy
What is your aim in philosophy? – To shew the fly the way out of the fly-bottle.
— Ludwig Wittgenstein, Philosophical Investigations 121
Some philosophers (e.g. existentialists, pragmatists) think philosophy is ultimately a practical discipline that should help us lead meaningful lives by showing us who we are, how we relate to the world around us and what we should do. [citation needed] Others (e.g. analytic philosophers) see philosophy as a technical, formal, and entirely theoretical discipline, with goals such as "the disinterested pursuit of knowledge for its own sake"[15]. Other proposed goals of philosophy include "discover[ing] the absolutely fundamental reason of everything it investigates"[12], "making explicit the nature and significance of ordinary and scientific beliefs"[10], and unifying and transcending the insights given by science and religion.[9]
The methods of philosophy
Ludwig Wittgenstein held[17] that:
The right method of philosophy would be this. To say nothing except what can be said, i.e. the propositions of natural science, i.e. something that has nothing to do with philosophy: and then always, when someone wished to say something metaphysical, to demonstrate to him that he had given no meaning to certain signs in his propositions. This method would be unsatisfying to the other – he would not have the feeling that we were teaching him philosophy – but it would be the only strictly correct method.
Most sources agree that the chief method of philosophy is logical[2], rational[15], critical[10] enquiry and argument "of a more or less systematic kind."[1] Thomistic philosophers refer similarly to the "natural light of reason".[12]
Stephen Toulmin defines three basic approaches to philosophy:[18]
- the philosopher as geometer: centers on formal inquiry; thinkers from Plato to Frege.
- the philosopher as anthropologist: tries to find the basics of human nature; thinkers such as David Hume and Adam Smith.
- the philosopher as critic: investigates the a priori conditions on which e.g. knowledge can exist; Immanuel Kant.
Historical methods
Three historical methods of philosophy have been the Ancient Greek, epistemic, and linguistic approaches.[citation needed]
The Ancient Greek phronetic approach to philosophy was prioneered by such philosophers as Socrates and Epicurus. The questions of this form of philosophy consist mainly of those relevant to the search for a happy life and the cultivation of the virtues, although political and religious philosophy is featured in recorded thinking. The general method of such philosophers was elenkhos, more widely known today as the Socratic method.
The epistemic approach centers upon the foundations of knowledge, in particular the debate between Rationalism and Empiricism. The distinction is mostly applied to modern philosophy with philosophers such John Locke, David Hume and George Berkeley on the empiricist side, and Rene Descartes, Baruch Spinoza and Gottfried Leibniz on the other. However, the distinction can be just as meaningfully applied to current philosophy.
The more recent linguistic approach to philosophy is practised both as a form of epistemology (the relation between language and world, the "meaning of meaning") and as the study of concepts and ideas. In Language, Truth and Logic, A.J. Ayer set two criteria for a (contentious) definition of philosophy. Firstly, the science must be a genuine branch of knowledge; and secondly, it must bear relation to the realm of ideas and impressions commonly known as "philosophy". Thus to Ayer, philosophy is defined as a wholly analytic task, and as a compilation of "in-use" definitions. It is commonly suggested by this analytic school of thought that questions such as "What is Truth?", or more generally "What is x?", are requests for definitions rather than facts about the world.
Rethinking intuition
Recently, some philosophers have cast doubt about intuition as a basic tool in philosophical inquiry, from Socrates up to contemporary philosophy of language. In Rethinking Intuition (ed. Michael R. Ramsey, William DePaul) various thinkers discard intuition as a valid source of knowledge and thereby the whole idea of an 'a priori' philosophy.
Experimental philosophy is a form of philosophical inquiry that makes at least partial use of quantitative research—especially opinion polling—in order to address philosophical questions. This is in contrast with the methods found in analytic philosophy, whereby some say a philosopher will sometimes begin by appealing to his or her intuitions on an issue and then form an argument with those intuitions as premises.[19]
In one form of experimental philosophy, called computational philosophy, philosophers construct several simplified artificial worlds with different ontologies and ethical systems, experiment with them, and confront them with the real world observations. This emergent research and scientific activity requires numerous meta-philosophical and meta-theoretical assumptions[20][21].
Progress in philosophy
 | This article needs additional citations for verification. (February 2009) |
It is common to hear both philosophers and non-philosophers complain that there is no progress in philosophy. Whether such a complaint is justified depends, of course, on one's understanding of the nature of philosophy, and on one's criteria of progress. In particular following the Holocaust, the possibility of progress in general has been more and more put to question[citation needed], by people such as Theodor W. Adorno. Despite such pessimists, however, the possibility of progress continues to be, whether by personal choice or by ideology, an ideal shared by many.
Metaphilosophical writings
Plato raised questions concerning
- the nature of philosophy and its methods (most explicitly addressed in the Meno)
- the value and proper aims of philosophy (in the Apology, Gorgias, Protagoras, etc.)
- the proper relationship between philosophical criticism and everyday life (a pervasive theme explored most famously in the Republic)
Ludwig Wittgenstein wrote about the nature of philosophical puzzles and philosophical understanding. He suggested philosophical errors arose from confusions about the nature of philosophical inquiry. In the Philosophical Investigations, Wittgenstein wrote that there is not a metaphilosophy.[22]
C. D. Broad distinguised Critical from Speculative philosophy in his "The Subject-matter of Philosophy, and its Relations to the special Sciences," in Introduction to Scientific Thought, 1923. Curt Ducasse, in Philosophy as a Science, examines several views of the nature of philosophy, and concludes that philosophy has a distinct subject matter: appraisals.
Henri Lefebvre in Metaphilosophie (1965) argued, from a marxian standpoint, in favor of an "ontological break", as a necessary methodological approach for critical social theory (whilst criticizing Louis Althusser's "epistemological break" with subjective marxism, which represented a fundamental theoretical tool for the school of marxist structuralism).
References
- ^ a b c d e f g Oxford Companion to Philosophy
- ^ a b c d ''Philosophy: The Basics, by Nigel Warburton
- ^ a b An Editor Recalls Some Hopeless Papers, by Wilfrid Hodges (from The Bulletin of Symbolic Logic Volume 4, Number 1, March 1998)
- ^ a b c d Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy
- ^ Philosophia, Henry George Liddell, Robert Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon, at Perseus
- ^ Online Etymology Dictionary
- ^ Webster's New World Dictionary (Second College ed.)., philosophy: 1. orig., love of, or the search for, wisdom or knowledge 2. theory or logical analysis of the principles underlying conduct, thought, knowledge, and the nature of the universe".
- ^ a b c d e f Penguin Encyclopedia
- ^ a b Mastering Philosophy, by Anthony Harrison-Barbet
- ^ a b c d e f g Collins English Dictionary
- ^ a b c d e f Introducing Philosophy
- ^ a b c d e f g h i j Modern Thomistic Philosophy, by R. Phillips
- ^ Philosophy Made Simple
- ^ Teach Yourself Philosophy
- ^ a b c Penguin Dictionary of Philosophy
- ^ Adler, Mortimer (1994). The Four Dimensions of Philosophy. New York: MacMillan.
- ^ Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus, translated by C.K. Ogden (1922), 6.53
- ^ Toumlin, Stephen: Knowing and Acting, 1976
- ^ Knobe (forthcoming).
- ^ Metaphilosophy, Journal published by Blackwell
- ^ Metaphilosophy Journal- Southern Connecticut State University
- ^ One might think: if philosophy speaks of the use of the word "philosophy" there must be a second-order philosophy. But it is not so; it is, rather, like the case of othology, which deals with the word "orthology" among others without then being second order. Ludwig Wittgenstein Philosophical Investigations Blackwell Oxford 1963 para 121.
- Rescher, Nicholas (2001). Philosophical Reasoning. A Study in the Methodology of Philosophizing. Blackwell.
See also
- Metaphilosophy/quotations
- Core ontology
- Philosophy of mathematics
- Progress (philosophy)
- Metatheory
- Meta-knowledge
- Meta-epistemology
External links
- Computational Philosophy of Science - Paul R. Thagard, 1993
- Metaphilosophy, Journal published by Blackwell
- Metaphilosophy Journal- Southern Connecticut State University
- Metaphilosophy at Curlie
- Lvov-Warsaw School, Kazimierz Twardowski, in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
