I mean, I get that philosophy is about discussing values and meaning and how we determine them. I just get really turned off by the overwhelming use of esoteric jargon. And the icing on the cake is that the jargon can't be related to either mathematical or physical concepts, which are things with well-defined rules and possibilities for relationships.
Granted, the jargon sometimes feels like it's just there to make concepts look more sophisticated than they are, but more often then not it's an attempt to condense an idea, like parentheses in a math equation or summat.
^ My net is slow right now so I'll check this out in a bit. Thanks anyway.
I understand that the jargon exists for a reason, and isn't meant to be off-putting to newbies/casuals (so to speak). Probably the better comparison would be to mathematical operators and symbols, such as the derivative or the integral. That said, a key difference from math seems to be that -- correct me if I'm wrong -- philosophy involves derived principles to explain and group ideas, to be applied to other situations and to be evaluated against assumptions, while mathematics estalishes first principles and builds on them to find emergent properties.
(Of course now I'm wading right into philosophy myself, specifically the branch about how we learn and understand ideas. I forgot its name at the moment...)
Edit: That article...seems to be about the difficulties of reading the works of various philosophers. I guess? Not sure what Tachyon found helpful about it, though I'm definitely not at the stage of actually reading any philosophers' works yet.
Comments
So are these...categories of ideas based on functionality, it seems?
(And how would one be a certain category, if these are categories of ideas?)
I understand that the jargon exists for a reason, and isn't meant to be off-putting to newbies/casuals (so to speak). Probably the better comparison would be to mathematical operators and symbols, such as the derivative or the integral. That said, a key difference from math seems to be that -- correct me if I'm wrong -- philosophy involves derived principles to explain and group ideas, to be applied to other situations and to be evaluated against assumptions, while mathematics estalishes first principles and builds on them to find emergent properties.
(Of course now I'm wading right into philosophy myself, specifically the branch about how we learn and understand ideas. I forgot its name at the moment...)
Edit: That article...seems to be about the difficulties of reading the works of various philosophers. I guess? Not sure what Tachyon found helpful about it, though I'm definitely not at the stage of actually reading any philosophers' works yet.