'Phi/105 Letter\r'

'Letter to a 20 or 21 Century Philosopher PHI/105 family line 23, 2012 Letter to a 20 or 21 Century Philosopher I am writing this garner to John Dewey regarding his supposition of pragmatism. I am choosing this theory because it interests me in the scientific aspect of your hark backing. I come that you chose to ch whollyenge logicians to answer the question of verity. This is a ambitious thing to sort out and make historical and current. Going up against some of the prison terms most tenacious thinkers and challenging them to come up with true answers was one of your strong testifys.I know that you were not totally opposed to modern logic as you create stated â€Å"logic hindquartersd upon the idea that qualitative objects argon existential in the fullest sense. To retain logical principles based on this conception along with the credence of theories of existence and knowledge based on an polar conception is not, to say the least, conductive to clearness †a co nsideration that has a good deal to do with existing dualism between traditionalistic and the newer relational logics. ”(Qualitative survey 1930) This statement to me means that you had maybe exhausted the traditional way of thinking that you had imagined.I take that you had to reach for more(prenominal) answers and different ways to get those answers. Truth is a laborious thing to come by and it is not easily obtained. I know that you were a philosopher of wisdom and that you used this to try and understand the realism. From you inquiry you did not stretch the truth exactly rather examined all of the parts that could be explained by science. In enumeration these things out you were able to determine if the phenomena that you were examining at the time were actually true or not.I find this interest because there atomic number 18 many things in this world that are hard to explain. I am confident(predicate) that there were many questions left unanswered for you b ecause the research technology was just not there for you at the time you were doing your research on different phenomena’s. The scientific method that you chose to follow would be a base for all of the scientists that followed your research and I find it awed that you are still known to this day. I weed see now by researching your history why you did not count in religion. I would go through to say this is ecause it is something that could not be proven. The phenomena that a creation could exists and create ever soything is just too unrealizable to conceive. It is impossible to determine by science even to this day if someone such as this did or could ever exist. There is no scientific method that notify prove the truth of this and this is why you did not believe it was possible. I would have to also harmonise with this point and if there were a way to research it scientifically and prove that such a being or person did exist I would believe that to be the truth.Wit h no truth about certain things it is hard to put any kind of faith in them. The more I think about these things the more I believe the scientific method the best(p) way for me to go about life and think about things. I believe that the other deuce schools are just as good as yours. I just lean a picayune more towards science then math or metaphysics. These other two schools are necessary as well for the understanding of almost all things that are explainable. There is no one school that is repair than the others and I would have to relate to all trio of them.As for the things that are just phenomena I would have to agree with you in analyzing the facts and truths that we are able to prove and believe in rather than just making things up and believing in false truths. John Dewey you are truly someone to look up to and I have found in your readings some truth to this life that we lead. Many things go unanswered but in time many things that were unanswerable willing get figured o ut and the truth shall be revealed. References course session: Ch. 9 of Philosophy: The Power Of Ideas. READING: Ch. 8 of Philosophy: The Power Of Ideas. http://www. infed. org/thinkers/et-dewey. htm\r\n'