?

A good fictional subjective story.... or a brilliant descriptive step in search

of better and better philosophy ?

But never ask or post any Questions about it?

What are they hoping to gain?

 philosophy or any philosophy Category^ ?

 They chase-fame (their-love-of-wisdom) but DO NOT contribute to it...

 Do they hate free and open critical philosophy that much, giving

 even more blatant "spin" when they murmur that philosophy uses

 "THE critical Method" ?  (as general SPIN & BLUFF).. ?

  Is this why they here CANNOT WRITE ABOUT and give philosophy

  knowledge of, 

 "Environmental Philosophy ?    

Is "Intelligent Design" philosophy plump in open possibilities much more

so than Scientific (Darwinian) biological Selection?

E.g  Present Darwinian selection versus Intelligent design?

See the Q.  What are the two types of philosophy mistakes... ?  third update

where the-sample-category of MATHEMATICS CAN BE SUB-DIVIDED from

old "selection" into new "design" mode.

E.g. Y. Zhang's finite-bound-proof (selection) from Twin prime conjecture(design).

(Zhang's proof weaker than the Twin prime intelligent conjecture, so to speak.

 Weak proofs and strong conjectures can be the preserve of philosophy which 

 may select strong resilient knowledge over/ from weaker information).   

What are they ?

If it was say impossible wouldn't philosophy by now be... "extinct", as a discipline ?

1)  Robert Sapolsky: The Biology of Humans at Our Best and Worst

2)  Greta Thunberg: The Environment of Humans in an Emergency.

Initially subjective philosophy ?

This is a valid question using modern biology science, where science can

further our understanding of both a mistake-in-philosophy and a success-

in-philosophy. See Youtube Stanford science lecture "Introduction to Human

Behavioural Biology" with Robert Sapolsky.

If you cannot figure why we can-lose-purpose, and to describe how to spot

the tell-tale signs where the losing of a Purpose or of an Aim means that

ones work flounders in-the-philosophy method taught...

Reading down in the comments to this lecture where in comment 12 down

it's said "When you pay too much attention to boundaries, you don't see the

big picture. All you see are categories."

And, "There's a corollary to that, When you pay too LITTLE to boundaries

you lose yourself in the big picture. YOU LOSE PURPOSE."

Can philosophy help ?

That of knowledge via the independent category of.. "Philosophy"?

One of the open (free) areas of inquiry.

Unlike the philosophy for example of Yuval Noah Harari ?

 1)   That we don't have freewill, (we do).

 2)   That if we learn HOW to deal with failure we can learn-from-our mistakes.

 2)   We here especially more from our Answers than from our Questions asked,

       we may believe. 

       That is we can learn more about our failures and mistakes, revising these

       over time to ask more pertinent Questions. And some religious philosophers

       commentators have taken this-to-the-extreme in that they have answered many

       more questions than they have asked... to the point where some have asked

       Zero Questions. They are "answer rich" so to speak, and continue to

       answer questions without adding-to-their meagre total of unknown (Question)

       knowledge.

       We may say of such religious philosophers that like Harari they have learned

       HOW to deal with failure as they have learned-from-their mistakes.

       And Harari may have more Questions to ask (especially so if he were here

       on Yahoo Answers) but DO THOSE religious philosophers above WHO

       HAVE answered many more questions here than they have asked questions?

       I have previously said that "no" because they may Have learned HOW to

       deal with their failures but that they HAVE NOT LEARNED FROM THEIR

       Mistakes.

       Like I propose Yuval Noah Harari has not learned-from-his-mistake

       concerning freewill ; and the resultant Almost self-perpetuating 

Unlike for example the open-book (authoritative) history since the ancient Greeks,

Plato and all ?

When that fence is being made from..  Barbed Wire ?

Why not use their "critical method" cushions they have-been-issued ?