"Question Everything" is one of the most common mantras in philosophy. We see it on the top of departmental websites, in blurbs about courses, and so on. (It is probably only surpassed by "Know Thyself", which really doesn't fit a lot of subdisciplines of contemporary philosophy.)
I feel like this really pushes an overly skeptical framing of how to approach philosophical questions, and on top of that it feels atomistic: We look at each proposition and 'question' it, as if any proposition should be defended on its own merits and not in relationship to a broader conceptual/scientific/philosophical framework.
As someone who is trending toward a more holistic and framework-based model of philosophical thinking (not completely, but more than other philosophers both now and in the past), I wonder: Does our mantra "Question Everything" really fit?
Not wanting to just be a critic without offering an alternative, I was kicking around "Consider Everything" or, less eloquently "Consider Everything and its Interconnections".
What do you think, philosofriends?
#philosophy #academia #academicchatter
"The Enemy Within" /
npub1m2…5v0w8
2025-02-04 15:46:07
Author Public Key
npub1m244mmje3rds4paprk42w6taz6ev3m8q2eg8y92w94q4lxycf6gqv5v0w8Published at
2025-02-04 15:46:07Event JSON
{
"id": "674e3f9d9387f3d3d95114b1b07e3a4806bc02dcad5e2af53ac66b1dc71aa35d",
"pubkey": "daab5dee5988db0a87a11daaa7697d16b2c8ece0565072154e2d415f98984e90",
"created_at": 1738683967,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"proxy",
"https://fediphilosophy.org/@pjw/113946392508427210",
"web"
],
[
"t",
"academia"
],
[
"t",
"philosophy"
],
[
"t",
"academicchatter"
],
[
"proxy",
"https://fediphilosophy.org/users/pjw/statuses/113946392508427210",
"activitypub"
],
[
"L",
"pink.momostr"
],
[
"l",
"pink.momostr.activitypub:https://fediphilosophy.org/users/pjw/statuses/113946392508427210",
"pink.momostr"
],
[
"-"
]
],
"content": "\"Question Everything\" is one of the most common mantras in philosophy. We see it on the top of departmental websites, in blurbs about courses, and so on. (It is probably only surpassed by \"Know Thyself\", which really doesn't fit a lot of subdisciplines of contemporary philosophy.) \n\nI feel like this really pushes an overly skeptical framing of how to approach philosophical questions, and on top of that it feels atomistic: We look at each proposition and 'question' it, as if any proposition should be defended on its own merits and not in relationship to a broader conceptual/scientific/philosophical framework. \nAs someone who is trending toward a more holistic and framework-based model of philosophical thinking (not completely, but more than other philosophers both now and in the past), I wonder: Does our mantra \"Question Everything\" really fit? \n\nNot wanting to just be a critic without offering an alternative, I was kicking around \"Consider Everything\" or, less eloquently \"Consider Everything and its Interconnections\". \nWhat do you think, philosofriends? \n\n#philosophy #academia #academicchatter",
"sig": "13c41db43396cfb0a8964c44d1ca1f31966d2b9fc1df4467e50cf20e4e0dda8492ca74256308f43018bdb6da7cbaf8bdac4d90c741193653cff489009263f6b7"
}