Log in

No account? Create an account
entries friends calendar profile Previous Previous Next Next
shadows of echoes of memories of songs
A watch(ed) maker never (produces a plague of) boils
Read 30 | Write
mobbsy From: mobbsy Date: November 7th, 2009 02:03 am (UTC) (Link)
I wouldn't say I've read a lot of philosophy, more pottered around its foothills a little with a quick jaunt up the enticingly geeky "Mount So-what-is-consciousness-anyway?" to find some Answers. When it comes to traditional philosophy, I wouldn't really recognise a Hegelian dialectic in the wild unless it was jumping around waving a special little flag.

Given that the essence of the moral basis for our society is founded in theological philosophy, it can't be ignored.

When a good philosophical argument comes down to "and so, God", it's more disappointing than anything else. I should admit to having read very little regarding philosophy from between the greeks and the enlightenment, partly because it seems to have been so constrained by needing to fit within a conventional theology. To my (doubtlessly over simple) view, philosophy really starts to get interesting with Locke (though Hobbes gets a creditable mention).

That said, I appreciate that the empiricists didn't spring up intellectually fully formed and suddenly decide one afternoon to have an Enlightenment. The little I know of the likes of Thomas Aquinas leaves me in no doubt of their brilliance.

I think overall, I find theological philosophy in itself interesting as an intellectual exercise, and often very informative. I prefer to try to pick out the bits of god and leave them on the side of the plate (or find better minds than mine that have already done that).
Read 30 | Write