@@ -3,9 +3,9 @@ However, like [FriedrichNietzsche] (who had argued that science was a decayed aspect of the [WillToPower]) or [MichelFoucault] he partly attempts this critique through constructing a genealogy of knowledge, and accordingly suggests that the historical basis for such discursive developments is likely to be perfectly pragmatic. Arguing that there is nothing but discourse is in itself taking a metaphysical stance towards the nature of reality despite being used to criticise the metaphysical enterprise. Without the historical narrative the logical contradiction becomes blatant.
Accordingly, his scepticism concerning the absolute foundations of knowledge led him to considering philosophy as a form of enlightened conversation of the same kind as that practised by literary and cultural critics. One particular extension of this is that such enlightened conversations translate into political terms as entailing democracy and certain rights, especially freedom of speech - see [OnFreeSpeech].
-* Compare to the view of [Mary Midgely]
: "The idea that the universe could be deflated down to the facts is one she has constantly fought against. We could not begin to understand a world that was made of facts and nothing else; such a world is itself an imaginative vision and not a scientific one."
+* Compare to the view of MaryMidgely
: "The idea that the universe could be deflated down to the facts is one she has constantly fought against. We could not begin to understand a world that was made of facts and nothing else; such a world is itself an imaginative vision and not a scientific one."
----
See other PhilosophersAndBrigands.
