Topics Philosophy

Question Why is it that there is often so much discussion in regard to what a particular philosopher meant to say (as opposed to the strength of his argument)? It seems unsurprising and yet kind of strange that we could be so unclear as to what philosophers' arguments are. People seem to find ample disagreement in their interpretation of even such philosophers as Hume who are widely regarded as extremely capable writers. I don't get it! This is not literature or fiction -- presumably most philosophers aren't interested in sowing ambiguity or couching their arguments in metaphors, so why the confusion?

Accepted:
February 7, 2007

Comments

Some philosophers revel in ambiguity or metaphor, but most do not;somephilosophers do not take the time to write clearly, but must takereasonable care about this. So, these factors don't get to the heart ofthe matter of why so much philosophicalwriting is so difficult to understand.

I think the most important point is simply that philosophicaltopics are difficult to discuss clearly in the first place, andespecially so when they are first developed or when new types ofarguments are put forward. Given this, I'm not at all surprised that alot of exegetical work needs to be done before one can assess thestrengths of the arguments even of the best philosophical writers likeHume.