While he's better remembered for his education works today, Philosophy is arguably his primary subject. As a result, Philosophy gets the largest section out of all the genres, by a large margin. It's not worth it. Like many of the sections, there's a lot of repetition from the initial "principles of reading" sections here. And, like all bad philosophy texts, he needs to spend a considerable amount of time on why philosophy is impossible and totally different from those other, lesser, forms of writing. History doesn't do X, manuals can't do Y, no one could ever figure out an answer to questions about existence, etc. I'll limit my whining and pull out two points that I found interesting, both about children:
1. Children as "better" questions than adults, because they ask "why?" (Philosophers are the adults who keep asking why. Don't think about all the scientists asking why stuff happens, they don't count.
2. Children are obsessed with right and wrong because, "their behinds are likely to suffer if they make mistakes about it." That's a clever turn of phrase.
No comments:
Post a Comment