[FOM] Replies to Putnam

[praatika@mappi.helsinki.fi]

Lainaus "Timothy Y. Chow" <tchow at alum.mit.edu>:

> Mainstream philosophy could also be defended (though perhaps less
> convincingly) in your terms as follows: Philosophers accumulate persuasive
> arguments, where by "persuasive" I just mean that a significant number of
> people (not all people, of course) find themselves persuaded by them.
> The systematic knowledge in question is just the collection of arguments
> (and in particular, is not any set of *answers to questions*).


This may be a bit off from F.O.M., but just a link: I recently  
attempted to list some good cases here:
http://philpapers.org/browse/4/thread.pl?tId=253

(All those interested in philosophy should find www.philpapers.org  
very useful)

Best, Panu



Panu Raatikainen

Ph.D., Academy Research Fellow,
Docent in Theoretical Philosophy

Department of Philosophy
University of Helsinki
Finland


E-mail: panu.raatikainen at helsinki.fi

http://www.mv.helsinki.fi/home/praatika/