Philosophy that’s not for the masses

The Philosophers' Magazine 53 (53):55-60 (2011)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

I do not see why all philosophers should be interested in communicating their thoughts to the world. Philosophy is no different in this regard from pure mathematics or microbiology. The idea that every scientist should be a part-time public speaker is absurd.

Categories

Add categories

Keywords

Reprint years

ISBN(s)

1354814X

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 104,599

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

My notes

Similar books and articles

Eternal bliss and why I am not that interested.Michael Ruse - 2016 - The Philosophers' Magazine 72:99-100.
Why should a postman pay for your education?Ophelia Benson - 2011 - The Philosophers' Magazine 53:12-13.
What should judges do?David Archard - 2004 - The Philosophers' Magazine 27:49-50.
What should judges do?David Archard - 2004 - The Philosophers' Magazine 27:49-50.
Why should a postman pay for your education?Ophelia Benson - 2011 - The Philosophers' Magazine 53:12-13.
Should we segregate the sexes? And should we use crowbars to do so?Michael LaBossiere - 2006 - The Philosophers' Magazine 33:37-37.
Can evolution tell us why we should be good?Michael LaBossiere - 2007 - The Philosophers' Magazine 37:30-30.
That’s the spirit. [REVIEW]Alberto Toscano - 2010 - The Philosophers' Magazine 51 (51):106-107.

Analytics

Added to PP
2011-12-02

Downloads
185 (#136,770)

6 months
7 (#617,556)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

James Ladyman
University of Bristol

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references