From: Robin Hanson (rhanson@gmu.edu)
Date: Tue Oct 05 1999 - 08:04:11 MDT
I got a masters in philosophy of science long ago.
This is what is called "analytic" philosophy, and
my comments must be limited to that.
The great thing about this sort of philosophy is that
no question is out of bounds. They excel at taking
questions that other disciplines have punted on, thinking
them too intrinsically fuzzy to deal with, and actually
making progress. Their methods are to be very careful
with language, and to be very careful about the logic
of arguments.
So philosophy of biology takes biology-related questions
biologists refuse to deal with, and makes progress at
least clarifying what the question could mean, and what
answers could make sense. Once you read this and
assimilate it into your thinking, you needn't think of
it as philosophy - you can instead think of it as biology.
For me there are very few things I think about that
I think of *as* philosophy - I index them in my mind as
biology, or physics, or economics, or whatever. But
quite often it was philosophers who deserve credit for the
insights, as it was they who weren't afraid to deal with it.
Like good administration, philosophy done well fades into
the woodwork.
Robin Hanson rhanson@gmu.edu http://hanson.gmu.edu
Asst. Prof. Economics, George Mason University
MSN 1D3, Carow Hall, Fairfax VA 22030
703-993-2326 FAX: 703-993-2323
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:05:25 MST