FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: Why do you think philosophy is so unpopular here?
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
(05-08-2010, 11:49 PM)Servus_Maria Wrote: [ -> ]It's not just philosophy. I'm often saddened to see threads about apologetics and theology only getting 5 or 6 comments and threads bitching about the NO or certain bishops racking up a couple of pages.

It's easier to bitch than to create a cogent argument.
(05-09-2010, 12:00 AM)Jesse Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-08-2010, 11:49 PM)Servus_Maria Wrote: [ -> ]It's not just philosophy. I'm often saddened to see threads about apologetics and theology only getting 5 or 6 comments and threads bitching about the NO or certain bishops racking up a couple of pages.

It's easier to bitch than to create a cogent argument.

Says you!
(05-09-2010, 12:47 PM)Herr_Mannelig Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-09-2010, 12:00 AM)Jesse Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-08-2010, 11:49 PM)Servus_Maria Wrote: [ -> ]It's not just philosophy. I'm often saddened to see threads about apologetics and theology only getting 5 or 6 comments and threads bitching about the NO or certain bishops racking up a couple of pages.

It's easier to bitch than to create a cogent argument.

Says you!

Heh  ;D
(05-08-2010, 07:14 PM)JayneK Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-08-2010, 06:09 PM)QuisUtDeus Wrote: [ -> ]ETA: this is an interesting read:

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12025c.htm

Thanks for this.  I learn best when I have a sense of the big picture and then fill in details.  That is just the sort of overview that I need.

Any ideas about how to study Aquinas?  As I said, I've done an intro course (we used Kreeft's Summa of the Summa).  I tried just starting at the beginning of a translation of the Summa and reading, but I bogged down.

There are two ways to read Aquinas: 1) in and of itself, and accept the glosses and one can still get a decent philosophical understanding based on the theology.  2) Understand what Aquinas is referring to which is more often than not Aristotelian philosophy especially when dealing with metaphysics and epistemology, etc.,  rather than theology.

Philosophers have a long standing tradition of building on and refuting other philosophers.  For example, Aristotle often goes through different philosophers' opinions before he makes his argument.  So, in some sense it is expected that one have a familiarity with what came before if one is reading a philosopher directly.

I think a brief review of Aristotle (even something like Aristotle for Dummies if it exists) will go a long way towards the metaphysical parts of Aquinas.  Nowadays, when there is something I don't understand a Google search often turns up some professor's class notes that explains it nicely esp. if it is straight Aristotle.  My understanding of Aristotle is pretty weak so I do this pretty often especially for the first part of the Summa.

But I think if you have a grasp of the basics of Aristotle's ideas, like a Summa of Aristotle notion,  that will go a long way in the parts you want to understand and you will be less frustrated.
Thanks, Quis.
(05-08-2010, 06:03 PM)JayneK Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-08-2010, 05:12 PM)JamieF Wrote: [ -> ]If you were to take a course in Formal Logic you would build up from there.  Until you have done that, you should not bother at all with theology, metaphysics, etc.  Logic is the essential foundation of knowledge - without it you can't deduce whether what you are reading is true or not.  

OK. I have done a course in Formal Logic.  What is the next step?  I just randomly took 3 philosophy courses that I needed as degree requirements and they don't fit together. (As well as the logic course, I did an survey of existentialism and an intro to Aquinas.)  I really want a good foundation in philosophy because I want to be able to do theology properly.   

You would want to do formal logic, followed by material logic.  That leads to physics, psychology, mathematics, theology and metaphysics.  All of those subjects use the foundations learnt in formal and material logic which is why they are so essential.
(05-09-2010, 05:46 PM)JamieF Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-08-2010, 06:03 PM)JayneK Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-08-2010, 05:12 PM)JamieF Wrote: [ -> ]If you were to take a course in Formal Logic you would build up from there.  Until you have done that, you should not bother at all with theology, metaphysics, etc.  Logic is the essential foundation of knowledge - without it you can't deduce whether what you are reading is true or not.  

OK. I have done a course in Formal Logic.  What is the next step?  I just randomly took 3 philosophy courses that I needed as degree requirements and they don't fit together. (As well as the logic course, I did an survey of existentialism and an intro to Aquinas.)  I really want a good foundation in philosophy because I want to be able to do theology properly.   

You would want to do formal logic, followed by material logic.  That leads to physics, psychology, mathematics, theology and metaphysics.  All of those subjects use the foundations learnt in formal and material logic which is why they are so essential.

Yes, logic is important to understand (since philosophy is all about argumentation), but formal logic can spend so much damn time on symbolic logic, which isn't really necessary as a pre-req to reading and understanding philosophy.  Informal logic is a much better "lay person" intro, especially since it has obvious and immediate application into someone's daily life.

Pax,
Jesse
(05-08-2010, 05:51 PM)QuisUtDeus Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-08-2010, 05:33 PM)Scipio_a Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-08-2010, 05:12 PM)JamieF Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-07-2010, 09:57 PM)MaterLaeta Wrote: [ -> ]I have absolutely no background in philosophy and have a hard time reading some of it.  There is no way I would post a comment on it.

Ignoring your use of paralipsis I will just say that if you have trouble reading philosophy, it is because you are not starting at the very beginning. If you were to take a course in Formal Logic you would build up from there.  Until you have done that, you should not bother at all with theology, metaphysics,


Hey take a look at this guy....this is exactly what I was talking about (all of it)......LOL

This is what happens when the Socratic approach is thrown out the window.  Philosophy loses all art and instead becomes solely a science, something that is far beneath its calling.  Philosophy is supposed to be above all arts and sciences and starts with a simple proposition: wonder.

Instead we get modern philosophers (who are really engaging in linguistic sophistry rather than philosophy) and empiricists who believe that nothing that can be weighed, measured, etc. really exists.

It's good to have a basis to understand philosophical discussion using convenient terms and lingo, but philosophy is not limited by that.

First off, paralipsis is regarding the use of a rhetorical trope, not logic or philosophy.

Second, without the science of philosophy, there can be no art as art is the perfecting of the science in practice.  I certainly hope you aren't accusing me of engaging in linguistic sophistry - nothing I have said contradicts or was not said by St Thomas.  My meagre training in philosophy so far has been 100% traditional Scholastic philosophy.

I would say the biggest problem in modern philosophy is people who think they are smart enough to ignore St Thomas.  That is where modernism came from, and modern existentialism. Trad Catholics can do the same damage.
(05-09-2010, 05:50 PM)JamieF Wrote: [ -> ]I would say the biggest problem in modern philosophy is people who think they are smart enough to ignore St Thomas.  That is where modernism came from, and modern existentialism. Trad Catholics can do the same damage.

One thing that I am sure about is that I do not want to ignore St. Thomas.  I had a sense of recognition, a sort of coming home, when I did that intro course on him.  I really liked Quis's advice to focus on St. Thomas because that is exactly what I want to do.  It is so nice when someone advises you to do what you wanted to.  ;D
Ahhhhhh phiosophy. Thank I God I cut that nonsense out after me cpontinental phelosophy courses and once I got to know witgenstien.
Mmmm
I dunno when your young sippin and first at university it does have its allure. Once u wake up to the scam thpugh I'd rather just play pool and sip and pinch a nice lassies bum
Sip
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7