“'Religion-philosophy divide more evident in Western philosophy'” plus 2 more

'Religion-philosophy divide more evident in Western philosophy'
A Fresh Look at Thomas Kuhn’s Philosophy of Science (Part 1)
Stallings shares philosophy on work ethic with educators

Five Filters featured article: "Peace Envoy" Blair Gets an Easy Ride in the Independent. Available tools: PDF Newspaper, Full Text RSS, Term Extraction.

'Religion-philosophy divide more evident in Western philosophy'

Posted: 04 Aug 2010 06:36 AM PDT

"The sharp line that we find between religion and philosophy in the western tradition is for the most part absent in eastern philosophy," Bauer, a professor of philosophy in Tufts University, told the Mehr News Agency.

Following is the text of the interview:

Q: Some scholars and thinkers believe that eastern philosophy is more practical than western philosophy, which is more theoretical. If this belief is true, then is dialogue between western and eastern philosophers possible? And, if it is, can we consider "Theory and Action," the subject of World Philosophy Day in Iran in 2010, a facilitator to dialogue between western and eastern philosophers?

A: This is a complicated set of questions which cannot be addressed without appealing to both cultural and political considerations, as well as philosophical ones.

Free exchange of ideas at the congress is vital. So whether World Philosophy Day 2010 will be an occasion for the facilitation of dialogue is in part a simple political question. One of course hopes that it will be.

Then there is the question of whether eastern and western philosophers differ too dramatically in orientation for genuine dialogue to be possible. You have characterized eastern philosophy as "more practical" than western philosophy, which you describe as "more theoretical." Let me try to unpack these claims.

Since the early modern period, western philosophy has become an increasingly secular enterprise. Of course, some western philosophers, even today, are deeply religious. And others are deeply interested in the philosophy of religion. However, as a rule, western philosophers understand philosophy as inquiry that does not take any spiritual or metaphysical or axiological commitments for granted. And, for the most part, western philosophers understand themselves to be participating in a specialized theoretical enterprise. Even when we are talking about religion or values and exhorting people to behave in one way or another, we for the most part are not addressing "the folk," at least directly, nor do we see ourselves as working from a shared set of metaphysical or ethical commitments. This distance from the hoi polloi has been reinforced by the professionalism of western philosophy in the 20th century—its complete entrenchment in universities, which hold the discipline to the same scientific standards to which they subject all other fields.

The sharp line that we find between religion and philosophy in the western tradition is for the most part absent in eastern philosophy. In other words, certain religious, metaphysical, and axiological values and commitments are fundamental starting points for eastern philosophers. Indeed, many eastern philosophical traditions, such as Advaita Vedanta, couldn't make sense of, and have no need for, a separate branch of inquiry called "ethics." Of course, philosophers working in eastern traditions spend a lot of time interpreting the shared values that their work builds upon. But precisely because these values are fundamental for the people—and not just the philosophers—who share the religious commitments from which they spring, the work eastern philosophers do tends to resonate in the real world in ways that western philosophy does not.

There's no reason to believe that western philosophers actively want their work to be irrelevant in the real world. Indeed, I suspect that the opposite is true. (The popular website askphilosophers.com, as well as the newly inaugurated and heavily trafficked philosophy opinion blog in The New York Times, suggest that many western philosophers do care about speaking to and with people outside the profession.) However, I think that it will take more than desire and good will for western philosophy to find a way to make itself relevant to people's lives and experience. I don't see that there's a way—in fact, I don't think it's a good idea—for western philosophy to fight its own secularization. What would have to happen, I think, is for western philosophers to see our irrelevance as a serious crisis in the discipline. For better or worse, the leading departments of western philosophy are filled now with people who are convinced that the esotericism and scientism of the profession are good things, things that show how rigorous and serious western philosophy is. So I don't see a sea-change in western philosophers' self-understanding coming any time soon.

I can't speak for eastern philosophers, but my guess is that they are going to be at least as unwilling to abandon the non-secular presuppositions that so richly inform their work as western philosophers are to alter their commitments to scientistic theorizing. From the western point of view, a radical shift in the enterprise would be necessary for eastern philosophical work to possess the level and quality of rigor that western philosophy, in both its "continental" and "analytic" incarnations, aims for.

What this means is that I don't think that conversations between eastern and western philosophers, even if they're conducted in with the greatest good faith, are going to erase the differences emphases that we find in western and eastern philosophy. Still, philosophical progress, however one defines it, depends fundamentally on philosophers' finding their views and presuppositions challenged by radically different approaches. For that reason, no philosopher from any tradition ought to turn down an opportunity to converse with a fellow practitioner who approaches the subject in a profoundly different way, provided that the fundamental rule of all philosophy—that participants be allowed to converse without political constraint—is respected.

Nancy Bauer is associate professor of philosophy at the department of philosophy in Tufts University. Bauer specializes feminism and feminist philosophy; continental philosophy, especially 19th-century German and 20th-century French, philosophy and film. She is author of "Simone de Beauvoir, Philosophy, and Feminism".

JH/HK
END
MNA

A Fresh Look at Thomas Kuhn’s Philosophy of Science (Part 1)

Posted: 05 Aug 2010 01:02 AM PDT

The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (Third Edition) by Thomas S. Kuhn, published by The University of Chicago Press, 1962, 1970, 1996 (Du Won Kang/The Epoch Times)

The most widely read work on the philosophy of science, was and still is very influential while being widely misunderstood.

In his famed book, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (Structure for short), Kuhn introduced some controversial aspects of science while confusing some of his points, which led to decades of misunderstanding and criticism. Furthermore, Kuhn's descriptions of what scientists normally do as dogmatic and rigid were not well received by many who celebrated the achievements of science.

He spent much of his later life trying to clarify his views about science while continuing to refine his philosophy beyond Structure. Some of the most lucid clarifications of what he thought about science were revealed in candid discussions not long before his death from cancer in 1996.

Misunderstanding and Criticism

Three decades after the publication of Structure, John Horgan, former senior writer at Scientific American, met Kuhn at his office at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Kuhn explained that the word "paradigm" had become hopelessly overused and was out of control, and it infected the intellectual community, where it came to signify any dominant idea, according to Horgan in his book The End of Science.

In that discussion between Kuhn and Horgan, and elsewhere, Kuhn said that he was partly responsible for the confusion for not using the term clearly and consistently in his original book, Structure. After the publication of the book, Kuhn's attempts to clarify what he essentially meant by "paradigm" were largely unsuccessful.

Kuhn explained on various occasions that he basically intended for "paradigm" to mean what he called an "exemplar," a concrete set of examples of problem solving that serves as a model.

A "paradigm" is what you use in the absence of a theory, and it plays a critical role in the development of a scientific theory, according to Kuhn. "You don't have a structure unless you include in it at least a few examples," said Kuhn in a 1995 discussion in Athens, Greece, published in The Road Since Structure in 2000, several years after Kuhn's death.

Many of the early responses to Structure came from social scientists, for which Kuhn was unprepared. Kuhn initially wrote Structure mainly for philosophers, many of whom proved to be highly critical of him, even unfairly in Kuhn's view.

Five Filters featured article: "Peace Envoy" Blair Gets an Easy Ride in the Independent. Available tools: PDF Newspaper, Full Text RSS, Term Extraction.

Stallings shares philosophy on work ethic with educators

Posted: 05 Aug 2010 01:46 AM PDT

Published: Thursday, August 5, 2010 at 3:30 a.m.
Last Modified: Wednesday, August 4, 2010 at 10:44 p.m.

Gene Stallings is just fine with being called "old school" on his philosophies concerning discipline and work ethic.

To make his point, he can reference a winning coaching career that spanned nearly 40 years and included a 1992 national football championship as head coach at the University of Alabama — but he doesn't.

Instead, the 75-year-old, who retired to his native Paris, Texas, more than a decade ago, said plainly, "It's all about how hard you're willing to work for what you want."

As a football coach, Stallings said he instilled discipline and work ethic in his players. His athletes didn't come to his meetings and fill in from the back rows. They sat up front, so he knew they could hear him well. They didn't wear ball caps inside. Removing them was a matter of respect and common decency.

"It's different now than when I was in the role of teacher," Stallings told Colbert County school district employees Wednesday during their annual in-service meeting. "I could get away with commanding respect. That's how I taught my players appreciation of each other. I showed my appreciation for them and everyone else who played a role in our operation. In turn, each of those people, including my players, were expected to show the same appreciation."

Stallings said teachers are his favorite group to speak to because they understand what it is like to have the utmost expectations placed on them.

"Just like cutbacks have affected football, they've affected you teachers," he said. "The only thing that hasn't been cut back (in education) is expectation. That just keeps getting higher and higher. It is demanded of you to improve yourself professionally, to teach harder and more wisely than ever. So, the question is, do you rise to the challenge? That's where your discipline comes in because it's you — not the parents who see their child a few minutes a day — that make the difference in those students' lives. It takes a while to get good at that, but you have to keep working at it, every year, getting better and better."

Stallings said it saddens him to see a lack of work ethic in teens today.

He reflected on his college coaching days, saying his favorite player was the fourth-team guy who knew he wasn't good enough to play Saturday but was the first one at practice every day and made it his job to see to it that the those who were playing were the best they could be.

"That's the kind of work ethic I most admire," Stallings said. "Of all the players I've coached, college and professional, it's that fourth-teamer who makes the real difference in someone else's life. As teachers, you don't make a lot of money, but love for your job and a passion for making these kids better is what drives you."

Throughout his talk, Stallings made reference to his son, John Mark. He began his talk by telling the crowd that although it has been two years since "Johnny's" death, "I have a heavy heart."

He said June 11, 1962, and Aug. 2, 2008, were the two saddest days of his life.

He said he vividly recalls the doctor at John Mark's birth telling him, "You have a mongoloid."

"That's not even a term used today to describe Down Syndrome, but back then, the news saddened his mother and I," Stallings said. "This young man grew to be the greatest teacher I ever knew. Everyone learned from Johnny, and we can all still learn from the lessons he taught. It didn't matter to him if you were a superintendent, president of a professional football organization or a janitor. He treated everyone the same."

Stallings shared funny stories of his son, including the time he asked John Mark who his favorite Alabama coach was. Without hesitation, he responded, "Nick Saban."

"I looked at him and said, 'But son, your dad coached at Alabama,' and he said, 'I know, but you don't now.' "

Stallings said he knew the evening before Johnny died that he wasn't feeling well and "just wasn't himself."

"I checked his oxygen saturation level, and it was very low — 63," Stallings said. "I went and got in the bed with him and said, 'How do you feel, buddy?' and he said, 'I fine.' He passed away the next morning."

The letters to Gene and Ruth Ann Stallings poured in, about 1,500 of them, many sharing how John Mark had impacted their lives. Gov. Bob Riley sent an Alabama state trooper to lead in the funeral procession. Books have been written about the younger Stallings, and facilities around the country have been named after him.

"This life is about the impact you make on people," Stallings said. "You've simply got to make a difference in people's lives. As a teacher, you're in a position to do that. Take the greatest advantage of that opportunity and make a difference."

Colbert Superintendent Billy Hudson said Stallings was the ideal speaker for the event, not because of his stature as a football coach, but because "he's a real teacher."

"Above all else, he's a man of integrity," Hudson said. "He's caring and down to earth. He's a man whose message we can all learn from."

Lisa Singleton-Rickman can be reached at 256-740-5735 or at lisa.singleton-rickman@TimesDaily.com.

Five Filters featured article: "Peace Envoy" Blair Gets an Easy Ride in the Independent. Available tools: PDF Newspaper, Full Text RSS, Term Extraction.

Philosophy

Thursday, August 5, 2010