My feeling about philosophy is that Leonard Neslon [the Kant/Fries school] and Hegel both have important points. It seems to me the differences between them are less than the similarities.
And both seem a lot better than almost anything that came after them.
[Most of 20th century philosophy after Kant and Hegel is simply trying to come up with anything significant by people afflicted with Physics envy.]
My feeling is that people would not be so prone to believe in pseudo science or flaky philosophies if they had more background in actual Physics.
A lot of people that went into the hard sciences did so as they were fed up with politics and politicians. They were looking for a bit of certainty in life. That is certainty that did not depend on what other people were saying. This is a good strategy for smart people. But what about us average?
For that there is the path of "Girsa"--say the words and go on. See the Musar book ארחות צדיקים [Ways of the Righteous.]
After you have finished the book four time and still do not get it, then review becomes important.
And both seem a lot better than almost anything that came after them.
[Most of 20th century philosophy after Kant and Hegel is simply trying to come up with anything significant by people afflicted with Physics envy.]
My feeling is that people would not be so prone to believe in pseudo science or flaky philosophies if they had more background in actual Physics.
A lot of people that went into the hard sciences did so as they were fed up with politics and politicians. They were looking for a bit of certainty in life. That is certainty that did not depend on what other people were saying. This is a good strategy for smart people. But what about us average?
For that there is the path of "Girsa"--say the words and go on. See the Musar book ארחות צדיקים [Ways of the Righteous.]
After you have finished the book four time and still do not get it, then review becomes important.
