Quote:
|
Originally Posted by harmonygirl wonderful post socratus! why would you want to break the circuit of abstraction? Maybe truth can be found there and extrapolated? I think you are right, however, the journey must remember the end and anticipate the beginning... |
Abstraction is what has taken philosophy to posmodernism (the end of abstractive philosophy). I have a theory about this, it's a bit complex. Kant was the resolution, the final point, the one that ended the discussion amongst philosophers during the 18th century. These were devided between rationalists (mostly French (Descartes leader), Italien (Spinoza leader), or German (Leibniz leader)) and the empiricists (British, who followed Berkeley, Locke, Hobbes and Hume).Then came Kant, who resolve dthe discussion by abstracting all conceptualization, defending that abstract would lead to the laws. It did, and there was idealism. Well, we can see a parallelism. 18th century-20th century. Because during the last century, the discussion between continental philosophy and analytic philosophy was in many ways parallel to the discussion amongst rationalists and empricists in the 18th cnetury. Well, the basis for the two points is basically this:
1. Hermeneutical Phenomenology, believe in a truth, A logic, a nature. Discuss about the methods and limitations of science and philosophy. Analytic philosophy.
2. Hermeneutical Existentialism, relativism and subjectivism (even nihilism), many truths, logic and rationality not usefull (or any argumentation). Discuss about the individual and the society, psicoanalysis and anthropology. Continental philiosophy.
Basically, I believe that we need another universalization tio solve this problem. Kant developed Abstractive Universalization (Abun). Well, I am developing something I call Analogous Universalization (Anun). Instead of conceptualizing by abstraction, it should and must be by analogy. This is a very complex idea, so I will give an example. Imagine you are a culturologist (if this profession exists at all) and you have encountered an entirelly new civilization. What methods should you use to understand it, deconstruct it? You might think of Kant's abstraction. Let's see an idea, an event, or anything n this new culture, abstract it so that it ends up under the same abstract concept as something from our culture. Then you can draw the law. Or you can remember Guille's post, and use analogy. See the evolution in their art, for example, and then the on in ours. Observe them and see the analogy. That is all you need, there ar eno rules no systematic programmed methodology of actions. Just analogy. It is better, because you can get rid of abstraction, you talk directly through the things themselves, just that you have still the same advantage that you got from abstraction, that you can make the laws.
What does everyone think?