I would just say that most professional ‘philosophers’ aren’t doing ‘philosophy’ as I mean the term. Ditto professional ‘scientists’ and ‘science’. Robin’s data suggests that most MDs are incompetent. Mounds of data suggests the same of most financial professionals. Why not generalize?
I look at the history of philosophy, not at professional philosophers, if I want to find competent philosophy.
Also, does the “professional philosopher community” have reality-grounded standards for what constitutes “good philosophy”? And could they say what the consequences would be of making such errors (relative to the current body of knowledge)?
Because without that, then being rejected by mainstream academic philosophy is no more worrisome than if you were criticized for not being up-to-date with the top theology, or not knowing which writers were truly “post-colonial”.
From some authors, I get the impression that their standard is no more rigorous than, “what all my buddies in major philosophy departments agree with”.
I would just say that most professional ‘philosophers’ aren’t doing ‘philosophy’ as I mean the term. Ditto professional ‘scientists’ and ‘science’. Robin’s data suggests that most MDs are incompetent. Mounds of data suggests the same of most financial professionals. Why not generalize?
I look at the history of philosophy, not at professional philosophers, if I want to find competent philosophy.
Also, does the “professional philosopher community” have reality-grounded standards for what constitutes “good philosophy”? And could they say what the consequences would be of making such errors (relative to the current body of knowledge)?
Because without that, then being rejected by mainstream academic philosophy is no more worrisome than if you were criticized for not being up-to-date with the top theology, or not knowing which writers were truly “post-colonial”.
From some authors, I get the impression that their standard is no more rigorous than, “what all my buddies in major philosophy departments agree with”.