Re:Why Paul Graham is sort of wrong about philosophy
by kristofferR on Monday May 26, 2014 @04:43PM
(#7801546)
PG mentions that in his blog post:
"Wittgenstein is popularly credited with the idea that most philosophical controversies are due to confusions over language. I'm not sure how much credit to give him. I suspect a lot of people realized this, but reacted simply by not studying philosophy, rather than becoming philosophy professors."
Re:Why Paul Graham is sort of wrong about philosophy
by jasode on Monday May 26, 2014 @04:49PM
(#7801568)
Ah yes, I see that now. I didn't notice that the TFA had a direct link to PG's essay.
Since the author (K. Matthew Dupree) could see Wittgenstein was cited, I'm wondering why he didn't address what the notable philosopher already said.
The more notable philosopher Wittgenstein also expressed this idea: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophical_Investigations#Pr...
The TFA proposes that 2 other branches of philosophy 1) ethics and 2) epistemology have not been affected by "confusion over words".
I think Wittgenstein would say that must be false because those 2 subject areas also are discussed using the mechanism of words. You can't escape "words" because philosophy (any branch) can't be discussed any other way.
I believe the TFA is arguing incorrectly because he thinks PG's criticism of philosophy is about "word confusion" when the higher meta-issue is that the "words" themselves handicaps all of philosophy.