RE: Philosophy is detrimental to the analysis of religion
April 2, 2009 at 5:55 pm
(This post was last modified: April 2, 2009 at 6:13 pm by Oldandeasilyconfused.)
Quote:It's common knowledge that a lot of philosophers end up going insane.
Really? Wow! Really? I didn't know that.
Name "a lot". Won't set a figure.I'll leave it to you to decide how many constitutes "a lot." A few sources for your claim would be nice too.
I WILL concede that some of my philosophy professors were a a little odd,and rather up themselves,but not insane.I will also concede that some philosophers bore me rigid, some are beyond me, and I think some are wankers. But there are some philosophers I like a lot for their lucid thinking: EG Plato and Bertrand Russell. If that makes me ignorant and a bit dim,too bad.
Does that mean I agree with your proposition? Depends; If your argument is,as it seems to me, an attempt to discredit philosophy as a discipline,no,I don't agree. If you are making a broad observation that some philosophers are nutjobs and incompetents,well of course.That's not secret.
There are few more boring human beings on earth than an honours philosophy student who has discovered the sophists.
"There is a simple explanation for everything and it's wrong" (H L Mencken)
PS saying;"it's common knowledge" is the same as saying "every schoolboy knows" or "a lot of people think". It's a logical fallacy,called "argumentum ad populum"
" Argumentum ad populum (Latin: "appeal to the people"), in logic, is a fallacious argument that concludes a proposition to be true because many or all people believe it; it alleges that "If many believe so, it is so." (wiki)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_...m#Examples
