It s it possible to simplify philosophy?
10
Jul
Yes and no, as we posted last week, there is complexity in simplification and not
everything that is simple can be correct, most of the times it is a reductionism. But someone who got it, at least in part, was Thomas Nagel, proposed to address such themes as: the world beyond minds, beyond other minds, the old paradox body and mind, how language is possible, there is the free will, which inequalities are unjust, the nature of death, and the meaning of life.
Without saying authors and names is addressing central problems of philosophy, will also use practical examples, didactic and begins with a question on things that is at the core of the question of much of the philosophy: “Would things look different if fact existed only in his mind … what if it was just a giant dream? … (Nagel, 1987). “It is even possible that you do not have a body or a brain – since your beliefs about it come solely from the data of your senses” (NAGEL,1987).
He then begins to divide the currents of philosophy, “the most radical conclusion to draw from here would be that your mind is the only thing that exists”, this is the solipsistic current.
The second position is whether or not an outer world exists, and if it exists, it may or may not be completely different from the way it seems to you – is there no way to know it? “, this is the position of skepticism . “If you can not be sure that the world is out of your mind, there is now yourself, how can you be sure that you existed before ?, and this refers to the problem of time, memory, information, language and being.
In the end, the author states that it is “impossible to seriously believe that all things in the world around you may not exist in reality” (p.20), this may be so evident that we do not need to substantiate, but there would still be three serious questions :
1) Does it make sense that the inner world is all that exists, but that the outside world guarantees that it is not different from what it thinks?
2) If any of these hypotheses are possible, is there any way to prove to yourself that this hypothesis is not really true?
3) If you can not prove that there is anything outside of your own mind, is it right to continue to believe in the existence of an outside world?
If the external world exists, the problem is whether everything moves as a clock, ie, is predetermined, so-called determinism, or if there is free will and things can be chosen, the author speaks of the choice of people between eat a nice piece of cake or a fruit, and the fact that the sun can not choose not to rise at the beginning of the day, but even in nature the physics of the particles show that there is an indeterminism in nature.
Approach this in chapter 6 hence the question of logic will come in chapter 7. If you think that there are both, you must think that there are other minds as well, and these minds will have experiences and vision of things different from yours, is there a way of seeing that the two are right or the wrong two, right or wrong?
He will approach this in chapter 7, and right and wrong before righteousness, will approach this in chapter 8, and death what is, chapter 9 and the meaning of life, chapter 10.
Nagel, Thomas. What Does It All Mean? A Very Short Introduction to Philosophy, UK: Oxford University Press, 1987.
