Ra, on the archetypes: "We have no dogma to offer"

[JustLikeYou]

The whole curatorship of this forum is based on a premise that is demonstrably proven incorrect by the above.

It is common in the academic philosophy world for professors to write dissertations and commentaries on eminent philosophers. If I end up in a Ph.D. program, I will probably write on Wittgenstein. In giving myself over to such a focused study of one unique, but profound perspective I necessarily sacrifice inclusion of other perspectives. Indeed, the whole purpose of such a work would be to understand Wittgenstein himself as clearly as possible.

And yet no one in the field actually thinks that when you write a dissertation dedicated to one perspective that you therefore embrace that perspective dogmatically. What a philosopher writes her dissertation on has no bearing on what she believe or does not believe, but concerns rather where her interests lie. I find Wittgenstein's writing to be beautiful, inspiring, surprisingly practical, and more lucid than nearly any other I've read, yet I don't buy into his claims just because they are his, or just because I am interested enough to engage in a focused study.

The spirit in which guidelines and curation of this forum were conceived is the same.