On the value of taking care of the roses (series: notes to myself)
They say that what matters sometimes is not the outcome but the process: not the success or failure of an action, but just the action itself. Maybe. But I always thought it was a bit of sour grapes. Didn’t really want beautiful roses in my garden, kind of line of thinking. The important thing was gardening. Or so you tell yourself, trying to be convincing. But I recite this loudly a few times and it still sounds quite lame. It's the philosopher's fault, because he asks the unpleasant questions. Would you have done it anyway, even if the roses had no chance? But above all, what if the process itself is also pointless? Perhaps the gardening is a failure too, like the dead roses. So you pause, on your way to the roses, and think: if the outcome is not what matters, and the process is not what matters, why caring for the roses? Better stop, or kill the realist awareness that shows the worthless nature of the whole enterprise. Is there anything left, if all is ...
Did you actually read what you linked to?
ReplyDeleteIts final statement is: "I believe the book to be an important work of ontology."
Yea, sure sounds like he is dimissing it and suggesting you read something else.
Yes, I did read it. And no, unfortunately, a phrase out of context makes no difference. Anyone who reads Kurzweil's review will realise that it is not positive and that there are better and far more important work of ontology to read. My suggestion is to start with Kant.
ReplyDelete