Through The Evolutionary Process, Those Who Are

I Think Philosophers Can Do Things Akin To Theoretical Scientists, In That, Having Read About Empirical Data, They Too Can Think Of What Hypotheses And Theories Might Account For That Data. So There's A Continuity Between Philosophy And Science In That Way.

When I Was 15 Years Old, Or 16, I Carried Around On The Streets Of Brooklyn A Paperback Copy Of Plato's Republic, Front Cover Facing Outward. I Had Read Only Some Of It And Understood Less, But I Was Excited By It And Knew It Was Something Wonderful.

One Way To Determine If A View Is Inadequate Is To Check Its Consequences In Particular Cases, Sometimes Extreme Ones, But If Someone Always Decided What The Result Should Be In Any Case By Applying The Given View Itself, This Would Preclude Discovering It Did Not Correctly Fit The Case. Readers Who Hold They Would Plug In To The Machine Should Notice Whether Their First Impulse Was Not To Do So, Followed Later By The Thought That Since Only Experiences Could Matter, The Machine Would Be All Right After All.

No One Has Ever Announced That Because Determinism Is True Thermostats Do Not Control Temperature.

Why Are Philosophers Intent On Forcing Others To Believe Things? Is That A Nice Way To Behave Towards Someone?