September 14, 2007
tugendhat
What function does philosophy have now? Is it becoming superfluous – because of the behavioural sciences, brain research and evolutionary biology? I am very careful about that. As far as the behavioural sciences are concerned, I think that people are too rash in looking for analogies – for example between human morals and animal altruism. That is what Konrad Lorenz, among others, did. As for brain research, I think it's rather crazy what's going on today.Why?
They can only find out what types of processes are going on in which parts of the brain. But then those professors of brain physiology appear and present theories about the nonexistence of human freedom. And those theories are only based on the fact that they see themselves as scientists and believe in determinism. They are not even aware of the philosophical literature of the last decades, which tries to not see determinism and free will in opposition. I consider that to be completely untenable speculation.
more from Sign and Sight here.
Posted by Morgan Meis at 09:51 AM | Permalink
Comments
His defense sounds a bit weak, unsure...boils down to the fact that busy science guys have not kept up on what philosophers have been doing, thinking, writing. Guess they have other fish to fry
Posted by: fred lapides | Sep 14, 2007 11:04:11 AM
They have other fish to fry, but nevertheless often they insist they have solved philosophical questions (but do not even know the questions). It is like a philosopher saying he is challenging (or supporting) a scientific theory without enough knowledge of it. One cannot say philosophers have other fish to fry for excusing them of their mistakes.
Posted by: Variable | Oct 14, 2007 3:29:27 AM
Post a comment