I consider myself a logical positivist, although I have never read the logical positivists. I read a little philosophy from time to time, always by skimming (so as to avoid having an aneurysm from getting pissed off). I believe the field is bankrupt intellectual fraud, with a handful of honest practitioners who didn't achieve any progress, because they are drowned out by impressive sounding political clowns. The honest folks are Russell, Carnap, Dennett, and I can't think of anybody else.
The problem with philosophy is not that the questions are bad, nor that they have no answers. The problem is that the mechanism philosophers use to sift through the answers over historical time is political persuasion, and this mechanism doesn't work. The result of political decisions is that obscuratist frauds like Hegel get credit for deep thoughts, and honest folks are marginalized and dismissed. Therefore, I don't see much point in attentively reading the works of philosophers, as their training is of negative value.
But maybe the internet can make some progress in this field.
Top network posts
- 434 Why does kinetic energy increase quadratically, not linearly, with speed?
- 167 Why do we not have spin greater than 2?
- 132 Reading the Feynman lectures in 2012
- 115 Proving you *can't* make $2011$ out of $1,2,3,4$: nice twist on the usual
- 83 What happened to David John Candlin?
- 81 What is a tensor?
- 81 Was mathematics invented or discovered?
- View more network posts →