Thread: God vs Evolution, can't we all just get along? (NOVA: Intelligent Design on Trial)
View Single Post
Old 02.11.2009, 05:43 PM   #114
!@#$%!
invito al cielo
 
!@#$%!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: mars attacks
Posts: 42,729
!@#$%! kicks all y'all's asses!@#$%! kicks all y'all's asses!@#$%! kicks all y'all's asses!@#$%! kicks all y'all's asses!@#$%! kicks all y'all's asses!@#$%! kicks all y'all's asses!@#$%! kicks all y'all's asses!@#$%! kicks all y'all's asses!@#$%! kicks all y'all's asses!@#$%! kicks all y'all's asses!@#$%! kicks all y'all's asses
Quote:
Originally Posted by pbradley
Well first I disagree with this assumption that ancient philosophy is irrelevant to consider or discuss because it is "before the invention of electricity, before there was empirical science."

i'm not saying that it's irrelevant as a tool or blueprint for certain modes of reasoning-- it is not. the study of ancient philosophy is great to see how people have grappled with questions, and to learn their methods.

but ancient philosophy dealt with many questions that are now silly and irrelevant. like the kant example i posted (or aristotle's classification of animals).

so yes, we can model certain responses to today's problems on ancient philosophy, but i don't think we can use the ready-made responses of ancient philosophy to today's problems, particularly when our sets of problems were unavailable to ancient philosophers. today's problems require their own solutions.

can you agree with this or no, and why?
!@#$%! is offline   |QUOTE AND REPLY|