On Having the Truth

Related Post Roulette

7 Responses

  1. Avatar H.C. Johns says:

    Mmm… I had a very similar experience coming to appreciate Continental and Catholic thinkers from my heavily analytic background. The turning point for me was finally reading Hegel, and recognizing that philosophy required delving into the false and the trivial as much as it did pursuing the true and the beautiful, a task that that requires not just hope but genuine love for those you read. (Cause god knows you’re going to need it.)

    I’ve often wondered if its possible to teach that kind of ethos to undergraduates (or graduates!) given the state of the subject right now. I’m inclined to say no, since it seems to be more of a matter of intellectual maturity than teaching methods, but I hadn’t considered what a difference single philosopher courses could make before… maybe there is hope after all.Report

  2. Avatar Michael Drew says:

    Yikes! What school or teachers were these that you survived so heroically with your intellect intact?Report

  3. Avatar Kyle R. Cupp says:

    H.C. Johns,

    While the history of philosophy no doubt contains plenty of falsehood and triviality, I don’t think I should begin my reading of a philosopher with the presumption that those are the characteristics of his philosophy. That approach seems to arise from the possessiveness toward truth that I want to get away from.Report

  4. Avatar Kyle R. Cupp says:

    Michael Drew,

    I’m not sure my intellect has ever been intact. Studying deconstruction sure didn’t help. 😉Report

  5. Avatar Michael Drew says:

    I just admire the way you have chosen to engage these thinkers on their own terms (on your own time, we might add), despite initially having been told that some were “good” and others “bad,” and in need of refuting. That seems close to educational malpractice there!Report

  6. Avatar Kevin Rice says:

    Is anyone going to ask about the book, or is that considered bad form?Report

  7. Avatar Paul Barnes says:

    One of my problems with post-modern thinkers that I have encountered is that I just don’t understand them. At all. It’s like we are speaking different languages. The words are the same but their meaning is different. It is the same for modern feminist writers. I just do not understand what they are saying, even when (I think) I am making a good faith attempt at understanding them.Report