"When I approach any philosophical text, I distinguish
between its meta-philosophy and its philosophy. The meta-philosophy
of a philosophy is how it describes or represents
its position. The philosophy of a philosophy is what it actually
develops in the body of its work. At the level of DeLanda’s
meta-philosophy, you’re absolutely right. He claims not to
advocate the existence of units. However, when you look at his
actual analyses, he’s intoxicated by units of all kinds and even
looks like an actor-network theorist."
And from this post (not Bryant):
Some excerpts from a Caputo interview. The first could be aimed at a kennilingual obsession with boundaries and meta-paradigms, which seems more inherent to the modernist project.
"The...paradigmatic modernist would be Kant, who divides the world up into three critical domains.... And so modernism is very emphatic about drawing borders between things and enforcing those borders, policing those borders. Kant’s philosophy is a kind of meta-philosophy of meta-critique, which is a kind of science of science which polices borders. So it makes for very strong distinctions between subject and object, between politics and between public and private."
This
IEP entry on contemporary metaphilosophy is interesting.
And this
one from Princeton.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.