

Experimental Philosophy: The New New Philosophy - robg
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/09/magazine/09wwln-idealab-t.html?ex=1354856400&en=42f8ef6876e20ada&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss

======
robg
I noticed the same gig in Pittsburgh, but they seemed to have a division there
between the xphi's and armchairs. It seemed weird to me that the xphi's could
do science and still call themselves philosophers. Why not just call
themselves scientists? That's the problem with philosophy these days, all the
good questions have been taken. So they're stuck doing literary analyses.

~~~
jraines
All the interesting questions left are epistemological ones about language
games, so literary works are a sort of test data.

And, yes, there are lot of hacks writing badly about these questions, but in
what fields are there not a preponderance of posers?

------
mnemonicsloth
_[Philosophers assert that a certain idea is Obvious]: well, that may be so at
Princeton or Rutgers. On the other side of the planet, it might seem [that it
isn't]. What should philosophers make of that?_

That their discipline is the impacted wisdom tooth of the modern academy.

~~~
lg
Well the big push in xphi is coming from places like Rutgers, where guys like
Stich, Maudlin, Goldman, just do very theoretical science.

