MA in Philosophy

mistymorning · 13th January 2009, 11:41pm

anybody done it doing it ?

**djtoast** · 13th January 2009, 11:48pm

kind of. i did an MA at glasgow university and did several philosophy courses during the course of that but it wasn't my principle area of study.

definitely an invigorating subject though! my mother's first degree was in philosophy and my uncle was a philosophy professor for fifty years so i've developed a healthy interest in, if not understanding of, quite a few areas of the subject.

what interest you particularly? it was political philosophy that i got on with the best...

mistymorning · 13th January 2009, 11:57pm

well I did 2 years of an MA already, then left and went back but am not doing philosophy anymore but think I would quite like to so considering trying to change again this year and see if they will let me go straight into 3rd year, but would like to hear from people who have maybe done the course and how they found it and what they did after it too. your uncle must have been a pretty cool dude btw 50 years I bet he could speak lol.

*LesMTS* · 14th January 2009, 12:01am

Prove that empiricism is a valid form of inquiry.

mistymorning · 14th January 2009, 12:09am

lol for god's sake well of course it's valid, question isn't regarding it's validity unless your senses deceive you, the question is whether it's the only valid form of inquiry.

an empricist would say yes, a rationalist no.

*LesMTS* · 14th January 2009, 12:09am

Quote:

Originally Posted by mistymorning

lol for god's sake well of course it's valid

Why?

mistymorning · 14th January 2009, 12:14am

well it is based on what is around you, what you see, feel, touch and hear, it is evidence based knowledge garnered through experience like a detective collecting clues to a crime and putting them all together to form the big picture based purely on what he knows from what he found. as I say unless your senses were deceiving you, if you trust them, then any empirically gained knowledge is valid as it involves no presuppositions.

*LesMTS* · 14th January 2009, 12:16am

Quote:

Originally Posted by mistymorning

well it is based on what is around you, what you see, feel, touch and hear, it is evidence based knowledge garnered through experience like a detective collecting clues to a crime and putting them all together to form the big picture based purely on what he knows from what he found. as I say unless your senses were deceiving you, if you trust them, then any empirically gained knowledge is valid as it involves no presuppositions.

Why do you trust your senses?

mistymorning · 14th January 2009, 12:18am

their only logical reason for being is to inform you of stuff, that's their function.

*LesMTS* · 14th January 2009, 12:20am

Quote:

Originally Posted by mistymorning

their only logical reason for being is to inform you of stuff, that's their function.

How do you know that's their function?

mistymorning · 14th January 2009, 12:23am

that's what they do, relate outside stimulus to your brain.

*LesMTS* · 14th January 2009, 12:23am

Quote:

Originally Posted by mistymorning

that's what they do, relate outside stimulus to your brain.

How do we know this?

mistymorning · 14th January 2009, 12:28am

cause we feel, see and hear it hah, but now we're just going round in circles, will the exam be this hard ?

*LesMTS* · 14th January 2009, 12:30am

Quote:

Originally Posted by mistymorning

cause we feel, see and hear it hah, but now we're just going round in circles, will the exam be this hard ?

YUS! You can't demonstrate that empiricism is valid without begging the question.
I thought you weren't ever going to fall into my tedious solipsist trap.

I think it is valid, though. But that's faith, no?

mistymorning · 14th January 2009, 12:33am

haha you know your stuff I think I'll just call you descartes.