From: David Buchanan (DBuchanan@ClassicalRadio.org)
Date: Sun Mar 09 2003 - 02:43:30 GMT
Sam and all:
The Oxford Companion to Philosophy:
"The shortest definition, and it is quite a good one, is that philosophy
is thinking about thinking. ...
Sam asked:
Firstly - who wrote the article? That might be revealing.
DMB says:
I don't have the Oxford Companion with me today and can't tell you who wrote
the article. But I hardly think it makes a difference.
Sam said:
Secondly, I think the difference between philosophy and theology lies purely
in the articulated commitments of the people doing it. Modern philosophy
(Modern meaning Modernist, not contemporary, although it's still probably
the dominant mode in some ways) is thoroughly SOM based, and denies that you
have to make a value commitment in staking out a position on those
questions. The MoQ, of course, disallows such an option. So the question
becomes - what are the guiding commitments which govern your choices between
the different metaphysical, epistemological and ethical questions? Logical
consistency is only a partial guide.
DMB says:
The articulated commitments of the people doing it? I really don't know what
that means and so I can't answer your question about my own "guiding
commitments". Please explain.
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Mar 09 2003 - 02:44:41 GMT