Operationalism constructs rigid correspondence, eliminates the problem of imprecise language, even non-existent language, by creating names for operations rather than allegories, normative usage, or worst of all, relying upon names of experiences rather than the actions that cause them. It has become increasingly frustrating, if not dismissive, to read the philosophical arguments of the 20th century, which seek to find truth in language through a variant of set operations - which of course, must be nothing more than circular. When the answer was just sitting there for everyone to pick up and run with. But It was apparently much better to seek truth as a means of persuasion of others, rather than to seek truth as a means of testing the content of ones testimony. And I think the psychologists and intellectual historians could spend a lot of time analyzing that particular bit of 20th century mysticism. Or perhaps pseudoscience. Or more graciously error. What vanity, or error would lead a body of people to seek authority rather than duty? I hope the depth of that question comes across. We all seek power. But the truth is just as likely to impede our ambitions as assist in them. But the academy, sought to take power from the church. Moral power. Reason and Science were the first blow. Darwin was the second. The Universalist State the third. It was all in pursuit of power. Philosophers of the 20th century, knowingly or not, were seeking power, not truth.
Posted on: Fri, 11 Jul 2014 08:08:28 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015