The fundamental peril of philosophy is to become entrapped in notions that are merely conceivable, without realizing that these same notions have no bearing on reality, that is they are not possible, and being conceivable does not make them so. In his book ,Walking the Tightrope of Reason: The Precarious Life of a Rational Animal, Robert Fogelin leads the reader through an argument of whether or not we can ever adequately answer any question that comes to mind. His approach is interesting but in defending his position, he only undermines his own conclusions.
“Human reason … is burdened by questions which … it is not able to ignore, but which, as transcending all its powers, it is also not able to answer (Fogelin, 169-170)”. Such is the fate of humanity, and the plight of philosophers, “doomed to either illusion or dissatisfaction” according to Robert Fogelin. Kant and Fogelin seem correct in that there exist questions beyond our capacity to answer, questions too compelling or interesting to ignore, and in the implication that these two categories of question overlap to some extent. At first read, accepting Kant’s claim may …show more content…
It may now be objected that these demonstrations may or will fail to convince skeptics, and perhaps so. A demonstration demonstrates, it offers evidence of a case or the negation of a case, it does not, in and of itself, confer belief. The point is to offer the possible over the merely conceivable, regardless of whether skeptics choose to believe. This pursuit, the demonstration of the possible, the possibility to choose not to be misled by illusions conceivable but not possible, this is where the satisfaction Fogelin implies will elude us can be found, it is possible, it is real, it is perhaps the only thing Fogelin is wrong about, even if he himself is a demonstration of
“Human reason … is burdened by questions which … it is not able to ignore, but which, as transcending all its powers, it is also not able to answer (Fogelin, 169-170)”. Such is the fate of humanity, and the plight of philosophers, “doomed to either illusion or dissatisfaction” according to Robert Fogelin. Kant and Fogelin seem correct in that there exist questions beyond our capacity to answer, questions too compelling or interesting to ignore, and in the implication that these two categories of question overlap to some extent. At first read, accepting Kant’s claim may …show more content…
It may now be objected that these demonstrations may or will fail to convince skeptics, and perhaps so. A demonstration demonstrates, it offers evidence of a case or the negation of a case, it does not, in and of itself, confer belief. The point is to offer the possible over the merely conceivable, regardless of whether skeptics choose to believe. This pursuit, the demonstration of the possible, the possibility to choose not to be misled by illusions conceivable but not possible, this is where the satisfaction Fogelin implies will elude us can be found, it is possible, it is real, it is perhaps the only thing Fogelin is wrong about, even if he himself is a demonstration of