Friday, October 31, 2008

Does the why matter?

If you are hungry (a) and you eat (y) or
if you crave something sweet (b) and you eat (y) or
if someone offers you food (c) and you eat (y) or
if you know you won't eat for a while and think you should eat (d) and you eat (y) or
if you get the munchies (e) and you eat (y) or
if you are stressed out and find yourself in the kitchen (f) and you eat (y) or
if you see see someone else eating (g) and you eat (y)

Can you say that because of (a,b,c,d,e,f,g) then (y)? Of course not. There is some school of philosophy that says x never causes y, even to the point of you let go of a ball and it falls, the two actions are unrelated. I think I understand it (and agree with it). Gotta read my books again...was it Kant, Hegel, Hume, Heidegger or someone else? Anyway I think it shows that you can only know about something through observation and that means that "the why" is not important, or not knowable or something of which you cannot speak. Maybe philosophy is prime for a rebirth. Was Wittgenstein really the last great philosopher? Is philosophy really dead? It is pointless to try to explain what is not explainable. I see that. An "a" is an "a". Get it? Ha, that Austrian really knew a thing or two...did he learn it or did he know it? Wicked!

No comments:

Post a Comment

Older Posts