Re:A Defense of Philosophy (against Paul Graham)
by agentcoops on Saturday December 20, 2008 @10:12PM
(#405120)
While I agree that slogging through Aristotle and Kant is incredibly painful (and many departments definitely over-emphasis), I think it's undeniably useful for one pursuing a career or even hobby in philosophy to have some knowledge of the discipline's history. If nothing else, it demonstrates exactly what not to do and how vital clarity and a rigorous, logical methodology are.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:A Defense of Philosophy (against Paul Graham)
by GavinB on Saturday December 20, 2008 @10:55PM
(#405158)
I just think that a succinct summary of their views by a clear modern writer would have been sufficient for my purposes. For others who are more interested, it's great to have.
Re:A Defense of Philosophy (against Paul Graham)
by andreasvc on Monday December 22, 2008 @05:10PM
(#406947)
The problem with this idea is that the jury is still out on the interpretation of a lot of ancient texts. Anyone summarizing them will either put their own spin on them or will tediously have to expound on all the possible interpretations.