I am a modern epistemological philosopher. Therefore my appreciation of Aristotle is weak. Especially his empirical stand is annoying (as opposed to empiricist who made a point that all knowledge came from experience.). The modern philosophers will still survive, even though philosophy has become a social web (a community).
Aristotle was largely revisited by the rise of modal logic by Saul Kripke (essentialism) and his Naming and Necessity. Its now become clear why Aristotle isn't entirely useless.
@@mac1414 I guess I wanted to make the distinction between empiricist and empirical. empiricist claims that ALL knowledge are gain by experience. Locke (who is an empiricist) claimed tabula rusa. There is nothing in the mind that didn't come from experience. The empirical philosophers on the other hand, claim only some knowledge are from experience. Aristotle had his logic (which are not from experience and they are deductive) but Aristotle also had, for example, ethics which comes from experience which are not deductive from modern understanding.
Absolutely fascinating, Professor Korsgaard is one of the great living philosophers
I have been wanting to see an interview like this with Korsgaard for quite some time! This is great! Thanks!
This is great, thank you for sharing and to Christine for doing the piece.
I would argue that dogs think normatively too.
'am I a good boy?'
@@talyemmanuela That's gold.
@@talyemmanuela I feel like dogs subscribe to emotivism more than anything
I am a modern epistemological philosopher. Therefore my appreciation of Aristotle is weak. Especially his empirical stand is annoying (as opposed to empiricist who made a point that all knowledge came from experience.). The modern philosophers will still survive, even though philosophy has become a social web (a community).
Aristotle was largely revisited by the rise of modal logic by Saul Kripke (essentialism) and his Naming and Necessity. Its now become clear why Aristotle isn't entirely useless.
@@mac1414 I guess I wanted to make the distinction between empiricist and empirical. empiricist claims that ALL knowledge are gain by experience. Locke (who is an empiricist) claimed tabula rusa. There is nothing in the mind that didn't come from experience.
The empirical philosophers on the other hand, claim only some knowledge are from experience. Aristotle had his logic (which are not from experience and they are deductive) but Aristotle also had, for example, ethics which comes from experience which are not deductive from modern understanding.