The progress of philosophy: Philosophy Forums

Philosophy Forums » General Philosophy » The progress of philosophy » The progress of philosophy

The progress of philosophy
Does it build upon itself?

The progress of philosophy

coriolis
Aspirant

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 19, 2009

Total Topics: 3
Total Posts: 36

Posted 06/23/09 - 06:32 PM: Subject: The progress of philosophy	#1
Do you consider philosophy to be additive in the sense that mathematics is additive? In mathematics, you start with the simple facts - addition, multiplication, etc. As math becomes more complex the initial truths are not superseded or refuted, but built upon. In philosophy do the later thinkers tend to discard what the earlier thinkers thought or do they build upon it? I'm reading Plato now, and intend to read Aristotle next. After that, maybe Philo of Alexandria along with the Old Testament, the church fathers, and the scholastic - pretty much in chronological order. I picked up some volumes on Avicenna, Averroes, and Al-Farabi too. I'm hoping to see a progression of thought. I was not a philosophy major in college, so I don't know how it's taught. Do they jump right in with later philosophers, or do they try to build from a foundation? I have my leisure time over the next 30 years or so (I hope) to absorb this in bite size pieces, without a rush to get ready for exams. I also have an interest in History. I read Herodotus before Plato, and it was helpful. I know what Socrates was talking about when he mentioned "how the Sycthians fought." I don't see much mention of Plato and Aristotle on this board. Are they considered to be irrelevant, old news, or something that forms one's basic knowledge, therefore not needing to be referenced? I'd appreciate any input.... Edited by Caldwell on 06/24/09 - 12:44 AM. Reason: spelling
I have a love affair with Socrates but I only know him in a Platonic way.

wuliheron
Tenured Poster

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jun 02, 2003
Location: Newport News, Va

Total Topics: 15
Total Posts: 4151

Posted 06/24/09 - 11:27 AM:	#2
Mathematics are not merely additive, if they were the field would advance much faster. For example, quantum mechanics is at heart a noncommutative theory meaning that it does not obey the commutative law of algebra where A+B=B+A. I suppose in that sense you could say that quantum mathematics are subtractive. Other mathematics such as Fractal Geometry also utilize fundamental alterations in the roots of all mathematics, logistics. Anyway, if you want to understand the trends in philosophy I suggest starting much earlier in history with Heraclitus. His work was very popular among the early Greek philosophers and is often considered the beginning of the division between eastern and western philosophy. What you have mentioned interest in so far are philosophies with deep connections to western religions. To fully appreciate such things, in my opinion, requires at least a basic understanding of the alternatives.

djluvsgod
Initiate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 14, 2009

Total Topics: 0
Total Posts: 14

Posted 06/24/09 - 03:14 PM:	#3
If you want an overview of western philosophy, the book my recent intro to philosophy class used was title "Sophie's World." A novel that the author uses to first give the history of philosophy and then to make a point. I think a term you might want to use is "progressive". Meaning it takes the previous knowledge into consideration and then goes a step further. I found most western philosophers seem to do this. But that is my opinion, I can't say that for fact.

pericles
Initiate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jun 26, 2009

Total Topics: 0
Total Posts: 1

Posted 06/26/09 - 09:33 PM: Subject: Plato and Aristotle	#4
I'd be happy to discuss Plato and Aristotle with you; they were the focus, along with Isocrates, of my doctoral dissertation. Now, however, I cannot remember who precisely it was who said that everyone is reiterating Plato; it might have been Nietzsche, but the Nietzsche fans might drop down on me with talons bared. Maybe it was Hegel, but he had a vested interest in thinking that every philosopher since Plato was merely redoing Plato. Wait a minute; it might have been Derrida... ? Can't remember off the top of my head. However, it has been my experience that all Western philosophy has built upon Plato and Aristotle, yes, and that most philosophers end up wrestling with Plato whether they willingly choose to or not.

Ivo Stanoev
Initiate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Dec 08, 2006
Location: Guangzhou, China

Total Topics: 0
Total Posts: 7

Posted 06/27/09 - 06:04 AM:	#5
pericles wrote: ... I cannot remember who precisely it was who said that everyone is reiterating Plato; "All Western philosophy is footnotes to Plato" - Alfred North Whitehead.

Cafe Rob
coffee aficionado

Usergroup: Members
Joined: May 28, 2007
Location: Auckland, New Zealand

Total Topics: 5
Total Posts: 326

Posted 06/27/09 - 01:37 PM:	#6
"coriolis" wrote: In philosophy do the later thinkers tend to discard what the earlier thinkers thought or do they build upon it? Philosophy is tested and characterized by the way in which it appropriates its history. It might seem to us that the truth of present-day philosophy manifests itself less in the formation of new concepts than in the new sound it makes audible of the old thoughts. Consequently the content of our truth depends upon our appropriating the historical foundations.

coriolis
Aspirant

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Apr 19, 2009

Total Topics: 3
Total Posts: 36

Posted 06/27/09 - 02:25 PM:	#7
Thanks for the replies. I'm ut this thread in my favorites so I can come back to it. With the excepton of Heraclitus, I'll move onward.
I have a love affair with Socrates but I only know him in a Platonic way.

Ich Werde
Student

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jun 02, 2009

Total Topics: 5
Total Posts: 66

Posted 06/28/09 - 01:20 AM:	#8
Philosophy starts with a foundation and the the building grows and we simply add more stones and make them better as time goes on.

Sorry, you don't have permission to post. Log in, or register if you haven't yet.