Is it possible to have a legitimate philosophy, One that addresses all the issues that have arisen, at least, in the Western tradition, without resorting to a list of names and their solutions. Can we have philosophy that doesn’t “teach to the test”?
Are there any free thinkers left?
Is it possible to confront philosophical issues without the name dropping and the predefined issues to their resolutions?
What exactly, outside of the analytical tradition, does teaching the name philosophers gain for a student?
In math, there is an obvious benefit to teaching. History; pretty much. Language; yup.
Analytical philosophy tends holds tight to methods and results and new thought within defined logical philosophical “laws”.
I would bet that given enough time, and intelligent and logical thinking, an individual would inevitably come upon the results that are taught. This is the reason for teaching: to bring the student up to speed.
But Hegel? Derrida? Wittgenstein ?
I’m not sure.
As well, I am not sure that upon certain reflection anyone would ever come across their ideas. So this begs the question as to the value of them. As well, then, appears to show that they might merely be creating the condition wherein their ideas have credence as a teachable product, over the inherent value of the ideas: teaching a distorted version of their value.
When we consider things in this light, I think we have to wonder just what that latter category of teaching is actually teaching.
The examples I would give are highly philosophical, so I can’t give any here right now (read my blog).
So, then; what do we do?
If it is merely critical thinking skill, I think we wouldn’t need those authors specifically; we have a huge library of authors who are less misunderstood to draw from to teach critical thinking.
I say this because the professors that taught me actually were — I gotta say — often way off in their assessment, so far as if one is allowed to think freely once being (supposedly) brought up to speed in them. It appears obvious to me that free thought actually locates how the teachers of many of the latter category of philosophers might actually be teaching a confinement of thought, and not the spirit of which such ideas they are supposedly teaching were written.