All the writers you mentioned understood
the -isms of their day. Even Nietzsche
who wrote in aphorisms and long
passionate diatribes was a university
professor and wrote criticisms of
Hegelian Idealism and Utilitarianism, as
well as Christian Morality.

Categorizing is a way of making truth
claims more precise in order that they be
accurately evaluated. Before you can ask
what the truth is about a particular topic, it
makes sense to look at what others have
said, attempt to understand it and then try
to evaluate it. After this you're in more of a
position to which of the views you've
examined are best or to cobble out a view
of your own.

The whole purpose of this forum is "free
thought", which is why I don't grade posts
for content. As long as it's civil and on
topic, feel free to post anything you like
here.

Prof. Borrowdale

On 2/9/2003 9:59:46 PM, Charity
Wightman wrote:
>I do not believe that when I
>signed up for this class I
>knew what would be expected of
>me. I enjoy reading books, I
>have never discussed who i
>have read or taken a class
>that spoke of the authors I
>enjoyed reading. I just liked
>the fact that writers like
>Nietzsche, Descartes,
>Dostoyevsky, Camus, Kafka, and
>others made me think. I had
>assumed that this class would
>also make me think. Instead I
>find myself writing posts, and
>loathing to post them. I feel
>ignorant, and unacceptable in
>this sphere of topics. I had
>assumed it would be more free
>thought instead I am realizing
>philosophy is a learned
>pre-prescribed way of thought.
>Each way of thought has it's
>own label, criteria, and
>category. I have no way to
>respond. I can not give off
>pithy little diatribes,
>because I am in fear of what
>if i read one train of
>thought, but got a completely
>different take on it then the
>rest of society. I think I
>enjoy it better as a solitary
>study. I want to broaden my
>mind not fall in with the
>masses.