Jikan wrote:Hi Kirt,
Semiotics historically and to the present has more to do with linguistics than with cognitive science. cf the semantics program at Indiana University, long directed by Umberto Eco... philosopher and novelist.
I understand but it can be linguistics itself could be subsumed into cognitive science. Linguists would object ....
I believe I said that semiotics was more properly classified under linguistics anyway (perhaps I didn't).
Logic is among the branches of inquiry philosophy has, historically and to the present, claimed for its own.
Of course, but logic is really mathematics.
Along with aesthetics and politics (political theory),
I really thought that what I would originally get as a response was political theory (the nonsense that helped create the river of blood called the 20th century) and aesthetics. Aesthetics may have some value as a contribution to science (theories should maximize beauty) and mathematics.
ethics is at the core of what philosophy sets out to do and how it defines the scope of its own effort.
Then philosophy failed over the last century. Inquiries into ethics has not created a humane system of ethics with value for people's lives.
Here's a useful article on the topic of logic's location within the discipline of philosophy, which, along the way, rebuts another of your claims--that philosophy has little to contribute to the present.
I will examine it.
Granted, the 20th century was a bloody one. But how are philosophers responsible for that bloodshed? How is that claim warranted?
Perhaps you missed the hijacking and gross misinterpretation of Nietzsche that helps justify the central horror of the 20th century, the inability of philosophy to formulate an intellectual response to wide-spread and aggressive anti-intellectualism in the US and much of the rest of the world, the rise of hyper-utilitarianism, the failure to formulate a cogent defense against rampant warfare and even the use of philosophy to justify war (Russell, first strike doctrine) and sometimes genocide (going bask at least to Plato). Then we have more recently a female, Russian author who imagined herself to be a philosopher, staring a pseudo-intellectual cult whose half-baked ideas dominate the halls of Congress (part of the rise of hyper-utilitarianism) against which so-called real philosophers have not mounted a general refutation (so how public to make this refutation? Think of Black intellectuals doing battle with Schokley on PBS [pre-PBS] circa 1968 (here's one from 1974
Philosophers have not been contributing to the welfare of humanity. There is a massive amount of dysfunction with no response to it at all from philosophy. Thus we have a vacuum, at least in the English speaking world, filled by a linguist, two astrophysicists (one dead since around 1996), and two biologists (one dead from circa 2000). This may be a slight exaggeration but not by much (this is a better situation than in Germany though where a single literary critic, recently deceased, survivor of Auschwitz, was in effect the only public intellectual, outside of poets and other writers and some actors in the entire German speaking world). We are not being served well.