FROM METAPHYSICS TO LANGUAGE PHILOSOPHY
333
did, and then says that in order for us to reach set ends effectively, we have
to use certain methods.
Gunther Stent:
Machiavelli did more than discover that all political insti–
tutions aim for ends. He showed that the ensemble of ends they aim for is
rationally inconsistent. Hence there are no means for realizing
any
version
of the City of God in the sublunar sphere.
Sandra Velasquez:
I have two points to make. The first point concerns the
discussion of dystopia and utopia. Assuming that there is an inherent instinct
in man to heal himself, to comfort himself, to shelter himself against physical
or emotional upsets and also assuming that this is inherent in all human soci–
eties world-wide, is it not feasible that this threat, or dismay placed upon the
composure of man in mankind will eventually lead him to act upon this dis–
may? Perhaps the modern disillusionment will lead to a new kind of social
movement, whether it be artistic, political, or something else. This is possible
only when there is an ideal, even an utopian ideal, that drives such a move–
ment. Social indifference and passivity in this array can only last for so long.
The second point refers to Susan Haack's discussion on ethics and phi–
losophy. It is often said that the question is as important, if not more
important than the answer itself. In a society that is leaning more and more
toward quick and easy answers, toward brevi ty of language, toward gener–
alization, art and talent that is well-researched, as well as deep inquiry, seem
to be in danger of becoming obsolete. Do you think it is possible that self–
declared philosophers who honestly want no claim to fan1e or profit would
be the ones to keep alive the craft of subtly questioning their environment?
I believe that those few today who still feel strongly about the Socratic
method of questioning and about a not-for-profit search for truth, this
minority of thinkers which dwells more in the streets than in high-class
institutions, will fight for questioning with passion, in an age that looks to
offer only easy access and thoughtless answers.
Susan Haack:
When I go to the American Philosophical Association
meetings, which I find myself obliged to do at least once a year, I do it
with great reluctance, and I often come home, frankly, in despair. But
when a graduate student who has been trying to figure out something dif–
ficult for six months and has been reporting for most of that time, "oh
dear, I'm going round in circles," and I have had to tell him, ''I'm sorry,
you're right, it's not working"-when such a student calls me at nine
o'clock on a Sunday evening and says "Oh my God, I think I've got it"–
then
I feel hope. There
are
people out there doing real work and figuring
things out; some of them are even at the APA, but it can be hard to find
them in the crowd.
