Robert Gressis (Cal State Northridge), Dan Kaufman (Missouri State) and Kevin Currie-Knight (East Carolina) discuss what is and isn't realistic to expect of philosophy. Topics include Realism (Rob) and Anti-Realism (Dan and Kevin), Foundationalism (maybe Rob) and anti-Foundationalism (Dan and Kevin), and what we do when we attempt to ground and justify our positions to others. The conversation sprang from a set of articles at the Electric Agora. In one, Dan argued that philosophy is largely incapable of making sense of even basic moral considerations; in two others, Kevin argued that individual temperament plays a significant role in forming our philosophies.
Daniel Kaufman and Crispin Sartwell talk about Crispin’s article for the New York Times, “Humans are Animals: Let’s Get Over It” (2/23/2021). (https://www-nytimes-com.newsproxy.inf...) Topics...
EA's own Kevin Currie-Knight and I discuss our respective essays, Growing up Metal and Growing up Grunge. We talk about the appeal of heavy...
Realism vs. anti-realism ... Is reality the sum of human senses? ... Why Crispin is allergic to idealism ... “Rabbity moments” and Quine’s radical...