Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
If you have an email ending in @hotmail.com, @live.com or @outlook.com (or any other Microsoft-related domain), please consider changing it to another email provider; Microsoft decided to instantly block the server's IP, so emails can't be sent to these addresses.
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE
Comments
I am not sure if this makes sense, but if someone believes that philosophy is misleading name for what academics in the philosophy department do, then why not just use more specific terms (e.g., ethics or fancy stuff like epistemology)?
Also, I am not sure I understand why the author of that article seems to believe that calling academic philosophy "ontics" is going to save it from "disrepute and incomprehension." I was under the impression that such confusion tends to come from a lack of knowledge of what academic philosophy is. If so, I really doubt that renaming it to something more ivory tower sounding and even less straightforward is going to make outsiders understand it better or respect it more.
>implying a redefining of the term will change the opinion of the Debosses of the world
Okay, wait a second. If philosophy already gets an unfair rap among laymen for being pointless pretentious intellectual masturbation, how does changing the name to something even less well-known and linguistically precise help the matter at all?
This is the philosophy equivalent of this:
Other alternative McGinn names for Philosophy include Cleverology, Noögraphy, Intuitorics, and I AM TOO A SCIENTIST.