Post a response:
|
I can understand how if you were given Austin to study you might be bored out of your mind! I've never found anything in Austin of much value. In his case one sometimes wonders what precise philosophical purpose his linguistic analyses serve. His pupils thought very highly of him, though, so perhaps he had more of philosophic interest to say in the seminar room. When I was a wee nipper I did find a lot of analytic philosophy tremendously exciting. I was very enthusiastic about the last chapter of Russell's History of Western Philosophy, entitled "The Philosophy of Logical Analysis". It seemed to promise something solid, some sort of real progress, rather than just another glittering philosophical system. Discovering Logical Atomism was a major event for me as well. I was entranced by it. (I had already mastered formal logic by reading through the article on 'Logic, Formal' in the Encyclopaedia Britannica.) Logical Atomism (as expounded in Wittgenstein's Tractatus, for example) was like discovering the Secret of the Universe (or so it seemed at the time - the feeling has long since worn off!). It was like actually finding the real 'Glass Bead Game' that Hesse had written about. It wasn't just analytic philosophy, though. I fell in love with Spinoza's Ethics. How could one not? At some time or other I've been in love with nearly all the great philosophers (including most of the continental ones, at least those prior to the 20th century). All this very powerfully determined my whole future career and the course my life would take. When I was about 14 (I think) my local bookshop had a whole section devoted to Penguin Classics - these were the days of the Facetti design - the so-called 'black Penguins'. The bookshop had an entire wall of them - a wall of solid black! (Of course, this was always the best design. More recently, Penguin tried to bring back black as a major feature, but they completely messed up the design. To make black look tacky takes some doing, but Penguin managed it!) It was at this time that I bought the Penguin Classics edition of Twilight of the Idols. This too I found incredibly exciting, but after the initial enthusiasm had worn off I wondered how much was perhaps not as well grounded as one might hope. Nietzsche is such a brilliant literary stylist that it would be easy to overlook lacunae in the foundations of his thought. Of course, Nietzsche remains a fascinating thinker and writer - certainly, I would not put BAP on remotely the same level... Nietzsche can be very insulting to his oppponents, sometimes even childish - but I don't think he ever called Plato a "lying cunt". :) So what's the moral of all this? Um... I'm not sure, except that perhaps what one finds philosophically exciting depends very much on one's introduction to the branch of the discipline in question. I suppose I was lucky since I was never "taught" anything, or directed by anyone to read anyone in particular - I just read whatever I wanted. In the end, I don't think philosophical truth (and I believe there is such a thing) can be discovered by storming the ramparts. It is something that requires care and delicacy, one step at a time, being grateful for any truth or insight gained, no matter how apparently humble. (I suppose this would be Austin's defence, except it is a matter of judgement whether in his case he lost sight of the ultimate philosophic goal.) I don't believe we can know Ultimate Truth now. We can know some things, but we must be content with modest gains, increases in our understanding of the nature of knowledge, perception and so forth. I meant to say something more about BAP, but this post is too long, so I'll say it separately. |