Here is a link to a new paper by Michael Huemer
http://studiahumana.com/pliki/wydania/In%20Praise%20of%20Passivity.pdf
or look at http://www.owl232.net/
Philosophers today (and thus have tended to be except for the notable exceptions of Kant, Descartes, and Leibnitz. ) tend to be innocent when it comes to science.
So when philosophers today make false statements about a field I know something about it tends to turn me off. And if the errors get too dense then I simply stop reading that philosopher. And postmodern philosophy is built on errors so I tend to not look at it at all. See Jerold Katz's book who mentions this problem.
http://studiahumana.com/pliki/wydania/In%20Praise%20of%20Passivity.pdf
or look at http://www.owl232.net/
Philosophers today (and thus have tended to be except for the notable exceptions of Kant, Descartes, and Leibnitz. ) tend to be innocent when it comes to science.
So when philosophers today make false statements about a field I know something about it tends to turn me off. And if the errors get too dense then I simply stop reading that philosopher. And postmodern philosophy is built on errors so I tend to not look at it at all. See Jerold Katz's book who mentions this problem.
