From: Joseph Sterlynne (vxs@mailandnews.com)
Date: Mon Sep 06 1999 - 15:19:10 MDT
> Brian Manning Delaney <bdelaney@infinitefaculty.org>
>> "J. R. Molloy"
>> If not, I suggest you stop making
>> this claim [that science is a subset of
>> philosophy].
>
>I have grounds: philosophy is about truth (some would put even more
>broadly), by definition. Sci. is about only _empirical_ truth (by definition,
>yours in fact).
If philosophy defines the terms used in science what, then, is the means by
which these philosophical arguments are made? It seems that all
philosophical questions ultimately become translated into scientific ones.
This is readily apparent if one looks at the philosophy of mind literature
today. But what is the argument that this is not happening or will not
happen to that more general truth-searching or -defining sector of
philosophy? That, too, is translatable into empirical terms. If you want
to know the conditions of truth you have to know what the knower of truth
knows. So you have to know the construction of the knower. For philosophy
to judge the foundations of logic it must use some formal system. Which
logic does it use?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:05:03 MST