The Ultimate Philosophical Error
I was discussing a topic with Bob today, and he said, 'I see -- you're not saying they're wrong -- you're saying they're inconsistent'.
I responded, 'But Bob, for a philosopher, being inconsistent is the ultimate error. If you're wrong about, say, God, you might face eternal damnation, but if you're inconsistent, you won't get tenure!'
posted by Gene Callahan @ 11:34 AM
3 Comments
3 Comments:
What's tenure? I have a real job. (Well, realer.)
You don't get tenure when you're inconsistent? Maybe that applies to philosophers... what about economists? Or does being consistently inconsistent count?
It's my pet beef, inconsistency. I have this argument all the time with people around me, to the point where I have come to the conclusion that morally 'good' people are simply following a parsimonious moral system.
"You don't get tenure when you're inconsistent? Maybe that applies to philosophers... what about economists? "
I don't know. But, while I'm not an ardent enthusiast for analytical philosophy, I acknowledge that analytical philosophers are REALLY good at what they do, which is to catch flaws in an argument.
Post a Comment
<< Home