Favorite Approaches and Paradigms in Philosophy

[Ren]

The title of this thread may sound like it is directed at specialists, but I would like to keep it very broad, so that everyone may contribute their insights.

I’m wondering if you guys have preferences when it comes to particular approaches, paradigms, and/or schools of philosophy, as well as associated methods. Do you lean more towards works that are very logical and technical; works that are more critical; or works that are more based on creativity and insight, at the price of possibly forgoing commitment to scientific method?

I think each approach comes with advantages and drawbacks. Logical works might be more secure about having “truth in sight”, but they might be (though by no means always) dry and not particularly thought-provoking. More literary approaches might be very well-written and inspiring, but their foundation in truth might be less obvious. Yet other approaches, like the so-called postmodern school, question the concept of truth itself.

Whether you write or read philosophy, you probably gravitate towards certain approaches and paradigms, broadly speaking. For my part, I think that in terms of method, I am particularly drawn towards existential phenomenology, in the vein of Martin Heidegger. I tend to favor philosophy that is creative and thought-provoking. I would be willing to forgive a certain degree of logical nebulosity in return for exciting new insights.

What about you, friends?

 

[Pin]

I'm very biased when it comes to philosophy. Basically, I look for ideas to justify my goals. Aristotle's works have been a useful tool for organizing my political beliefs. Seneca reminds me not to waste my time.

 

[Wyote]

Philosophy doesn't exist

 

[Pin]

Philosophy doesn't exist

Neither does @Ren.

 

[Deleted member 16771]

In general terms I'm attracted to the Neo-Kantians of the Baden school for their insights into the epistemology of and the fundamental nature of truth-seeking endeavours, be it science or humanities. I'm thinking of Wilhelm Windelband, Dilthey, Rickert (and then on to Weber, &c.).

I think they are the foundation of much subsequent antipositivist experiment and macro-scale thinking in the social sciences, humanities and philosophy which followed.

 

[Wyote]

Weber

 

[Ren]

Philosophy doesn't exist

Guess you'll have to live with that from now on, friend.

 

[Ren]

Neither does @Ren.

 

[Wyote]

Guess you'll have to live with that from now on, friend.

lolol needs moar Schopenhauer

 

[Ren]

lolol needs moar Schopenhauer

Schopenhauer's look and style are definitely one of the best among philosophers. Have you been digging into existential comics?

 

[Wyote]

Have you been digging into existential comics?

My life is an existential comic, so yes

Schopenhauer's look and style are definitely one of the best among philosophers

I see what you did there

 

[Ren]

In general terms I'm attracted to the Neo-Kantians of the Baden school for their insights into the epistemology of and the fundamental nature of truth-seeking endeavours, be it science or humanities. I'm thinking of Wilhelm Windelband, Dilthey, Rickert (and then on to Weber, &c.).

I think they are the foundation of much subsequent antipositivist experiment and macro-scale thinking in the social sciences, humanities and philosophy which followed.

I think that when I'm finished with the Magic Mountain (honestly not my favorite book ever, pace @Rowan Tree) I'm going to read more about Neo-Kantianism. For too long I've just been kind of thinking, "well it's kinda like Kant" but without really exploring the schools in question with that much attention. I particularly like the idea of macro-scale thinking as applied to the humanities and which seems to influence your own thinking and research quite a bit. I know that Dilthey was an important influence on Heidegger, so I've had him bookmarked for quite a while. Interestingly, I'm pretty sure Rudolf Carnap, a ferocious positivist who hated Heidegger, also initially emerged from the Neo-Kantian mold.

Do you think you were also attracted to Neo-Kantianism for the bridge it seemed to offer with other disciplines?

 

[Wyote]

I particularly like the idea of macro-scale thinking as applied to the humanities and which seems to influence your own thinking and research quite a bit

Carnap

 

[Ren]

I'm very biased when it comes to philosophy. Basically, I look for ideas to justify my goals. Aristotle's works have been a useful tool for organizing my political beliefs.

Some of Aristotle's works are rather easy to understand and apply, that's something I've always admired about him. But he also has the more "out there" stuff, like in some parts of the Metaphysics, which personally I enjoy a lot, too. He seems to have been a rare combination of abstract and pragmatic.

Seneca reminds me not to waste my time.

 

[Wyote]

Guess you'll have to live with that from now on, friend.

 

[Ren]

Pretty much the mental image I have of Carnap, lmao.

I'm a member of a Facebook group dedicated exclusively to logical positivist memes about the end of metaphysics. The horror, the horror!

 

[Wyote]

 

[Ren]

Too true. But someone's not happy.

 

[Wyote]

But someone's not happy.

 

[Pin]