Is talent for philosophy measurable by any yardstick?
2007-11-03 03:49:03 · 10 answers · asked by Pansy 4 in Arts & Humanities ➔ Philosophy
Apparently, mathematics and the arts are easier to measure. Just give the child a math bowl/competition test or allow the child to perform/paint/draw.
Considering philosophy is an adult activity... what measure is there?
2007-11-03 03:51:32 · update #1
Considering that many of the worlds best philosophers disagreed with each other this would be difficult.
2007-11-03 03:57:54 · answer #1 · answered by mars 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Virtually anything is measurable if you define it.
Ah but there's the rub, what is the definition of a 'talent' for philosophy.
I personally think Plato & Marx were academic boneheads. I think Zen is borderline inanatiy & I think Locke was painfully naieve. So within the Philosophic communtiy one might have problems with a consensis of what is being measured.
That said though, IQ is probably a fair measure of PQ. If one has a knack for the rules of math and language, it would seem likely to imply a gift for thinking in general.
2007-11-05 03:53:17 · answer #2 · answered by Phoenix Quill 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Extremely interesting question!!
I would measure a philosopher by the degree of love for truth.....
1) how deep and through one thinks to seek the truth
and
2) how flexible one is to never hold on to any truth so discovered, since there are always many other truths beneath and beyond each truth.
Well, I state what to measure, because I am at my wit's end as to how the above two factors can be measured, if at all.
2007-11-03 11:29:53 · answer #3 · answered by small 7 · 6⤊ 0⤋
How much would you tip a waitress who is rude to you? What did you do the last time there was genocide on this planet? How much did you donate when there was a natural disaster? Did you ever stop to help someone change their flat tire? Let's measure by what they did, rather than what they said or wrote. Martin Luther King Jr was a great philosopher. A critic is worthless if they took no action to correct it.
2007-11-03 11:01:29 · answer #4 · answered by Bobby K 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Interesting and yet easy question.
Well through his work in the first place.
Style. Structure. Ideas - Context. A work that is deep and not superficial. The effect it has on the reader. And many more.
Analysing the text from top to bottom.
By the way you can`t compare two philosophers that wrote about different subjects - you can compare though two philosophers who wrote about the same subject.
2007-11-03 11:58:25 · answer #5 · answered by Jonah 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
There are very few philosophers.
Most people, including me, are not educated specifically in this area. We all however like to say how we feel or think about something.
Having talent specifically for philosophy - you need to be a deep rational thinker and have good writing skills to set out your ideas on paper.
2007-11-03 11:58:36 · answer #6 · answered by Angel 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
One might have studied philosophy as a subject and might have acquired some scholarship .That does not require any talent.A philosophical temper is a different matter , as 'small' pointed out.
2007-11-03 14:03:00 · answer #7 · answered by Padmini Gopalan 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I would present them with some bad philosophy and ask them to refute it. One of the main things philosophy teaches you is the ability to spot fallacious thinking.
2007-11-03 11:24:38 · answer #8 · answered by Todd 5 · 3⤊ 0⤋
You don't... Simple...someone who is truely adept at something doesn't need to prove it, it just shows.
2007-11-03 10:57:42 · answer #9 · answered by <3YAY<3 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
you can measure them right away:
EMPTY CANS MAKE THE LOUDEST NOISE!
2007-11-03 12:32:46 · answer #10 · answered by Lance 5 · 2⤊ 2⤋