March 11, 1998
Dear Norm,
I couldn't agree more with what you said in your Philosophy as a
Blood Sport piece. I work primarily in the huge gulf between
philosophy and the sciences, and I find it difficult to steer
between the standards of the two disciplines. I certainly find
talks with scientists both more friendly and more productive.
I still recall a colleague asking me, when I took up a new job in
Calgary, what importance science had for philosophy. As I picked
my jaw up off the floor at witnessing what appeared to be
ignorance beyond my possible comprehension, and thoughts of
Aristotle, Descartes, Locke, Leibniz, Kant, Peirce, Russell and
Kuhn flashed through my head, my colleague turned in triumph at
my dismay, and shuffled off in victory. I never came to like the
department, despite my developing love of the city, and
eventually left in despair at the destructive arrogance of the
more ambitious of my colleagues. I couldn't get respect, because
I would not hurt and even maim. Well, I have to respect myself
first of all. I'm glad that some students see there is no great
gain in putting down others. The best you can do that way is
stay in the same place. If philosophy comes to be regarded as
irrelevant, we will know who to thank. What a shame!
John Collier
email: pljdc@alinga.newcastle.edu.au
|