tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1724832200411147167.post4940548652890180242..comments2023-10-19T02:24:24.166-07:00Comments on The Chasm: On the Tension in Doing PhilosophyCarbondale Chasmitehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13594688764570047726noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1724832200411147167.post-31136408350268857082009-09-04T22:22:15.034-07:002009-09-04T22:22:15.034-07:00I do not even think it is the old problem of clari...I do not even think it is the old problem of clarity. Much can be preserved in translation into clarity. I think these two styles cannot at length co-incide except in some weird dualistic level of adequacy--a model, in part, inspired by Mohanty.Carbondale Chasmitehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13594688764570047726noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1724832200411147167.post-2122702446673731912009-09-04T08:24:11.787-07:002009-09-04T08:24:11.787-07:00Ah, the old problem of clarity. What analytic phi...Ah, the old problem of clarity. What analytic philosophers generally mean by "clarity" is ammendability to be phrased in either logical or commonsense terms. However, so much is lost in translation into logical terms that many human phenomena benefit little from it. In translation to commonsense terms, our intuitions perhaps, thinking is thought in terms of the sedimented historical, cultural, lingusitic, etc. biases that we *already* have. Philosophic thinking is not impossible in either setting, but thought is so restricted from the outset....<br /><br />I propose that you consider the issue another way. "Continental" proposes very, very different models of "clarity" than those to which you are familiar. In fact, I would argue that these models are far more demanding as they *require* much more historical knowledge and hermeneutics, which is often mistaken as "obscurantism." Well, if one works under a different model of clarity and is not trained in that before oneself ... any surprise?<br /><br />Likewise, I said that that analytic text was nearly impenetrable. I don't suppose they weren't clear. I suppose I'm not adequately trained to understand that, despite a good deal of analytic training.<br /><br />You need to develop each tradition independently and then bring them together, otherwise you'll likely just violence Continental and not really understand it, and Continentals spot that instantly. (Just as analytics spot those berets....)khadimirhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12960757465883819380noreply@blogger.com