give-up on DeviantArthttps://www.deviantart.com/give-up/art/what-we-have-made-47015574give-up

Deviation Actions

give-up's avatar

what we have made.

By
Published:
445 Views

Description

i have had the wonderful opportunity to study some of aristotle's work this semester, and what constantly intrigues and pleasures me is the fact that he refuses to allow his philosophizing to be entirely theory-driven or intuition-driven (or such is the idea that he sets forward). philosophy is a strange creature when considering 'proof', as the mathematician's proof is quite different from the philosopher's. in axiomatic mathematical systems, a proof symbolizes the actual existence or inexistence of the theorem, while philosophical proofs are more along the lines of strong persuasions. many steps between premises may not be debated, but the truth of the initial (and many subsequent) premises may. thus, the danger in philosophy, something aristotle apparently saw and attempted to deal with, is that since we do not have proofs of absolute certainty, we can persuade or rationalize some rather obnoxious, strange, and even terrible theories. by following purely theoretical lines, philosophy can lead to some very dark places. this is where his intuition kicks in. he is not advocating pure intuition (as this would be entirely contrary to the nature of rational philosophy), but he is using it as a check. this is what i believe modern philosophy has lost. at some point (or more likely, gradually), philosophy lost its practical nature and turned into a field that many (rightly) see as a dead-ended, out-of-touch, skewed reality. where has the practicality of philosophy gone? many philosophers claim to be searching for some 'truth', but the practical nature of their inquiry has been entirely lost (if it existed at all). so many theories that we read today not only make us turn our head, but make us wonder, "does this person actually live this way?" or better yet, "is it possible to follow this theory?". examples abound. solipsism (especially external world skepticism), strict determinism, and pure relativism are just a few example. is it possible to function as though my being is the only truly existent thing in the universe (solipsism/e.w. skepticism)? do people really act on a functional level as though they have no ability to decide their actions? do pure relativists really accept all ideologies without drawing "arbitrary" lines? society and philosophy today are both in need of more great minds willing to philosophize, but also to ground their theories reasonably. the twentieth century was witness to many atrocious events, and i cannot help but wonder if it was partly due to ungrounded, functionless, and eventually dangerous ideologies forged purely theoretically and without the aid of common sense and intuition. we made the bed.
apologies for the rant.
Image size
900x605px 364.33 KB
Make
NIKON CORPORATION
Model
NIKON D70s
Shutter Speed
1/40 second
Aperture
F/3.5
Focal Length
18 mm
ISO Speed
320
Date Taken
Jan 14, 2007, 2:55:11 PM
© 2007 - 2024 give-up
Comments14
Join the community to add your comment. Already a deviant? Log In
nimic-si-totusi's avatar
late-night rants... sounds sooo familiar! anyway... i would recommend Nietzsche to you since i see your interest in philosophy... "Beyond Good and Evil" is a great book so far! (i haven't finished it yet) it has some things that i strongly agree with and others that i don't necessarely do agree with... (he is quite absurd in certain assumptions) but just reading philosophy is sooo extraordinary!