Bertrand Russell
- Thread starter Wolff
- Start date
Hear, Hear!!
Appertaining to philosophy, my affections, I find, extend to only two guys: Socrates (pronounced SOH-CRATES) via Plato and Nietzsche. Do not query why, for I digged them both.
Russell, so I figure, is another intriguing character. I have not studied much on his work, mind you, but I have read his "A History of Western Philosophy" which I have found pleasantly adequate and entertaining.
Based on what I have read on his philosophical work, I'd have to say that I am almost 180 degrees the contrary of the positions that Russel took. Very loosely, as I am not too versed on all the little niceties of the culture of philosophy and its history (that is, all the 'isms' composing the academe) he was strictly anti-psychologistic in his stance regarding "metaphilosophy," or the species of work pertaining to that glorious and elusive emprise of foundationalizing all the sciences and uniting them under a common discourse a la Kant.
He was about "mathematics" and principles of logic he believed were 1) as impersonal and rigid as mathematical principles and sufficient for a proper philosophy of science; and 2) were those that should be divorced, following "1" from the human being (read "psychologism"). This is a striking error. His kind of work wouldn't be able to survive a collapse under heavier scrutiny. There's no chance in the world that the fundamentals of his work do not ultimately fall into an abyss of absurdity.
____
hehe, enough pseudo-intellectual ranting for today. But, do tell, why on Earth would an aspiring lawyer be a fan of Russ? Seriously, I don't know too much about Russell apart from very superficial sketches.
Appertaining to philosophy, my affections, I find, extend to only two guys: Socrates (pronounced SOH-CRATES) via Plato and Nietzsche. Do not query why, for I digged them both.
Russell, so I figure, is another intriguing character. I have not studied much on his work, mind you, but I have read his "A History of Western Philosophy" which I have found pleasantly adequate and entertaining.
Based on what I have read on his philosophical work, I'd have to say that I am almost 180 degrees the contrary of the positions that Russel took. Very loosely, as I am not too versed on all the little niceties of the culture of philosophy and its history (that is, all the 'isms' composing the academe) he was strictly anti-psychologistic in his stance regarding "metaphilosophy," or the species of work pertaining to that glorious and elusive emprise of foundationalizing all the sciences and uniting them under a common discourse a la Kant.
He was about "mathematics" and principles of logic he believed were 1) as impersonal and rigid as mathematical principles and sufficient for a proper philosophy of science; and 2) were those that should be divorced, following "1" from the human being (read "psychologism"). This is a striking error. His kind of work wouldn't be able to survive a collapse under heavier scrutiny. There's no chance in the world that the fundamentals of his work do not ultimately fall into an abyss of absurdity.
____
hehe, enough pseudo-intellectual ranting for today. But, do tell, why on Earth would an aspiring lawyer be a fan of Russ? Seriously, I don't know too much about Russell apart from very superficial sketches.
The Wanderer
Watcher of the Storm
bertrand russell never quite figured out what he was about. he changed his ideas and philosphy quite a bit. depends on what you read. he was into mathematics though.
Russell's inconstancy is characteristic of many philosophers. And like many philosophers, he did maintain a few constants, among which were his "antipyschologism" and his movement to excise transcendental discourse and intuition (Kantian) from metaphilosophy.
Just a small addendum.
- May 9, 2001
- 2,794
- 1
- 0
Originally posted by E V I L
__________
hehe, enough pseudo-intellectual ranting for today. But, do tell, why on Earth would an aspiring lawyer be a fan of Russ? Seriously, I don't know too much about Russell apart from very superficial sketches.
Physics major in college
Seriously the man's brilliant: great mathematician/logician, excellent analytical philospher, importan activist and a Noble winner in Literature(!)
Klaha
Jag är kejsaren
Isn't Principia Mathematica hundreds of years old? By Galileo or Newton or some guy? Or am I thinking of something else...or should I just shut up?
Demonspell
cheating the polygraph
Similar threads
