What philosophy might be about: Some socio-philosophical speculations

Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 43 (1):3 – 19 (2000)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

What is philosophy about? Has it a content all its own? A method? This paper examines a few responses to these questions. At the extremes are the Proper Content and the No Content views. The former identifies philosophy with a delimited set of core issues. The latter, abandoning any proper subject-matter for philosophy, identifies it with a core modus operandi. Neither of these is especially compelling. More dynamically conceived is the Vanishing Content view which sees philosophy as continually and inevitably abandoning its business to newly emerging sciences, acting largely as an exploratory initiator of inquiry which is ultimately eliminable. Though promising, this view underrates the resilience and adaptability of philosophy, especially its current drive to forge alliances with and ultimately amalgamate itself into newer areas of study. This tendency is explored via the Partners-for-Progress view, which foresees philosophy becoming dependently indistinguishable from the theoretical wings of various autonomous disciplines. Finally, I examine the Family Inheritance view, which suggests that philosophy cannot merely vanish into the sciences because of idiosyncrasies in its very institutions which are self-sustaining and, more than most, deeply beholden to its own past which it keeps ever present.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,672

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Dialogue and Dialectic.David Evans - 2007 - The Proceedings of the Twenty-First World Congress of Philosophy 10:61-65.
Are there different kinds of content?Richard Heck - 2007 - In Brian P. McLaughlin & Jonathan D. Cohen (eds.), Contemporary Debates in Philosophy of Mind. Blackwell. pp. 117-138.
In support of content theories of art.John Dilworth - 2007 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 85 (1):19 – 39.
Representationalism and indeterminate perceptual content.John Dilworth - 2007 - Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 6 (3):369-387.
Is content holism incoherent?Kirk A. Ludwig - 1993 - Grazer Philosophische Studien 46 (1):173-195.
.[author unknown] - unknown
Is there a problem about nonconceptual content?Jeff Speaks - 2005 - Philosophical Review 114 (3):359-98.
Memory and time.Jordi Fernandez - 2008 - Philosophical Studies 141 (3):333 - 356.
Experience and content.Alex Byrne - 2009 - Philosophical Quarterly 59 (236):429-451.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
32 (#497,200)

6 months
2 (#1,186,462)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

How is this Paper Philosophy?Kristie Dotson - 2012 - Comparative Philosophy 3 (1):3-29.
Whole set of volume 3 no 1 (2012).Bo Mou - 2013 - Comparative Philosophy 3 (1).

Add more citations

References found in this work

The Style Theory of Art.James D. Carney - 1991 - Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 72 (4):272-289.

Add more references