Postmodernism has a lot to offer.

An easy-going introduction to Process Philosophy.

Bergson subscribes to a kind of dualism.  Like Descartes’, his cleaves subject and object.  However, in contrast to the Cartesian doctrine, for Bergson this cleft is much more a consequence of rather than a grounding for his philosophy.

The deeper distinction for Bergson lies between what he calls the quantative and the qualitative [1]. One important difference that sets these apart lies in the nature of the multiplicity which is inhered.  Quantitative multiplicity consists in juxtaposition, making it possible to speak of discrete ‘objects’.  Qualitative multiplicity, on the other hand, consists in interpenetration.  Unlike the former, the latter is not amenable to division, with major consequences for epistemology. » Continue reading “Essai sur les données immédiates de la conscience / Time and free will”

Text: http://www.realfuture.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/Introduction-to-Metaphysics.pdf

Audio: http://librivox.org/an-introduction-to-metaphysics-by-henri-bergson

Essence, knowledge and certainty.

In particular, I liked the essays ‘Locke and the Frontiers of Common Sense’ and ‘Revolutions in Science: Some comments on the Theory of Relativity’.

“For it is not intrinsic clearness or coherence that make ideas persuasive, but connection with action, or with some voluminous inner response, which is readiness to act. It is a sense of on-coming fate, a compulsion to do or to suffer, that produces the illusion of perfect knowledge.”

“If all the arts aspire to the condition of music, all the sciences aspire to the condition of mathematics.”

Text: http://www.gutenberg.org/files/16712/16712-h/16712-h.htm

Audio: http://librivox.org/some-turns-of-thought-in-modern-philosophy-by-george-santayana/

Awesome. I think.

One of both Nietzsche’s and Schopenhauer’s favourite books.  What, you need me to say more?!

Super short introduction the quality of whose reflection on Foucault’s thought I’m as yet in no position to judge.

To those familiar with Russell’s thinking, this will be a rather predictable and bland account.  Disappointingly little discussion of why and how science is epistemically special.