Philosophical Traditions

At the moment, I believe, there are only two major philosophical traditions in the whole world.

Edited by Paul - 02-Jun-2006 at 13:51

In Thailand at uni they read postmodernism, nowadays. Foucalt rules humanities departments.

Edited by Paul - 03-Jun-2006 at 08:33

Edited by gcle2003 - 05-Jun-2006 at 07:29

I loathe Post-Modernism with every fiber of my being. As a scientist I find the notion that there is no such thing as truth to be rubbish.

Originally posted by Odin I loathe Post-Modernism with every fiber of my being. As a scientist I find the notion that there is no such thing as truth to be rubbish.

So science, at bottom, is a faith?

Post-modernism is fantastic! it counters the whole ideals of dogmatic thought and asks people to question EVERYTHING and realise that the truth for one person will not be the truth for another, so instead of accepting the truth examine the truth and arrive at a conclusion on which truth is most logical.

The real test of any religious scholors, scientists, athiest scholors etc would be to get recognition by post-modernists as they are the hardest group to please

That has the feel of a categorical mistake. Saying 'science is a faith' is like 'evolution is a faith' or 'Manchester United is a faith'

It is a faith to some, they worship and live by its dogmatic rules, why are there fantatical supporters of Man U? why are their fanatic athiest followers of Darwinism?

They have a faith in it. Darwinism is a theory not "absolute unquestionable truth", to accept it as the only truth is to have faith in it.
    

Edited by Bulldog - 24-Jul-2006 at 10:31

Originally posted by Paul Well goldilocks tried mummy bear's religion and found it too soft, then she tried daddy bear's postmodernism and found it too hard. So finally she tried baby bear's science and found it just right.

    
I love the analogy! You seem to have a way with words paul. For some reason many of your post are enlightening and funny at the same time!

Originally posted by Paul Originally posted by Odin I loathe Post-Modernism with every fiber of my being. As a scientist I find the notion that there is no such thing as truth to be rubbish.   Post modernism doesn't deny there's a truth, in fact it acknowledges there's more truth today than there's ever been in history.   In fact every for single thing in existance you can imagine there are at least a thousand truths around, all of them contradictary to one another.   Postmodernisn isn't interested in any of these truths, it's interested in analysing the mechanisms and justifications believers of one of these truths use to say theirs is the correct one and all others wrong.   So of course scientist don't like postmodernism, because postmodernism says to scientists; Prove it... That is not prove your truths using your methodology, but prove your methodolgy itself.   When a religious group finds a truth, they prove it using their methodology, revelation from god, scripture so on. Proving something with your own methodolgy is invalid, so you have to prove the methodology itself. Prove scripture, prove God.   Scientists believe they are in a special privilaged position that they should simply say "we're scientists" and be believed unquestioningly and be exempt from the scrutiny of methodology placed on other groups.   Postmodernists say to scientists when they find a truth, prove your methodolgy. Don't prove your truth using logic, impiricism and rationality, that's like a bible basher using god and scripture. Prove logic, rationalism and impiricism themselves, and show these are not simply mystical beliefs.