A peculiar thing of doing cross-disciplinary research is this feeling of not-belonging that, after some time and trouble, translates into freedom once the desire for opportunity in inquiry outgrows the understanding of security in disciplinarity.
-
-
We got to do a society of philosophers in different practices. What unites us is not a field but methodology.
-
While I'm sympathetic to the general idea, I'm not sure method is the right basis for unity. Methods are important, but they are also sensitive to the particulars of the questions being asked. Different question, so too the methods.
-
Sounds plausible on a generalist level but here is why I highlight methods: they may be sensitive to questions but since the sciences are highly specialized so is any Phil in Sci practice. So Phils may be unable to judge the adequacy of content, sometimes even questions, 1/2
-
regarding each other's specific areas (say olfaction vs. gravitational wave physics) but they'd be able to see whether the methods by which each Phil interacts with their field yields benefit, discussion and analysis (for Phil and Sci). 2/2
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.