tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1724832200411147167.post3143872528976893687..comments2023-10-19T02:24:24.166-07:00Comments on The Chasm: Grounds of PhilosophyCarbondale Chasmitehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13594688764570047726noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1724832200411147167.post-89504633626865708542009-01-13T01:26:00.000-08:002009-01-13T01:26:00.000-08:00Careful, I think I walk a double-edged sword on th...Careful, I think I walk a double-edged sword on this point, and I think it is possible to misconstrue that my post is dedicated to some form of analytically-driven conceptual analysis. While I think the analysis of grounds to be an invaluable aspect of philosophizing about grounds, I'm open to interrogating grounds on the same methods that Heidegger uses to put to question grounds in the first place--phenomenological description and the hermeneutic task interrogating such grounds would involve.Carbondale Chasmitehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13594688764570047726noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1724832200411147167.post-52100874613341464542009-01-12T13:17:00.000-08:002009-01-12T13:17:00.000-08:00Good post. I agree that the thinker who sets out ...Good post. I agree that the thinker who sets out to use reason and discourse to undermine the ground of those very activities is at least question-begging. This is one of Descartes' best lessons, I think.<BR/><BR/>Many have, as you say, started from different places and used different potential grounds, but we should not infer from the difficulty of <I>choosing</I> between those grounds that none of them is valid.Vanitashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03190524739107446297noreply@blogger.com