larvalsubjects Says: October 12, 2007 at 9:22 pm I do not myself think that philosophy begins in wonder or is a matter of curiosity. Only a very comfortable aristocratic thinker such as Aristotle could say such an obnoxious thing. Rather, philosophy seems to appear at very specific moments in history (I don’t think it exists at all historical moments), when tremendous changes are taking place. With Marx, I would argue that the aim of philosophy is to change the world (or even oneself, though I don’t find personalist philosophies very attractive), not contemplate it. I think the history of philosophy– in those moments where it has managed to exist –bears this out. larvalsubjects Says: October 13, 2007 at 12:22 am Yes, I believe that philosophy is always political… This is not the same as claiming that all philosophy is political philosophy... At any rate, look at those points in history where philosophy occurred and was produced. Then look at what is going on during these times. It seems to me that very little had to do with sitting around and speculating. For instance, I would argue that Hume is hardly interested in an epistemological problem or a “problem of knowledge” at all, but that the entire deployment of the Treatise and Enquiry unfolds against the backdrop of the European revolutions, shifts from monarchial to democratic government, and the critique of religion necessitated for this to occur (monarchy founding itself on religious authorization). Hume’s “epistemological problem” and alleged skepticism, has profound political implications and is everywhere unfurled as a weapon against despots, demagogues, and the priests that authorized them. Was Hume a “man of action”? Nope, not so much. His action was his concepts and what he rendered thinkable.
Savitri Era of those who adore, Om Sri Aurobindo and The Mother.