<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: A philosopher&#8217;s toolbox</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.amerika.org/2009/science/a-philosophers-toolbox/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.amerika.org/2009/science/a-philosophers-toolbox/</link>
	<description>What is falling, push.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 29 Jul 2010 15:50:15 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: gabe</title>
		<link>http://www.amerika.org/2009/science/a-philosophers-toolbox/comment-page-1/#comment-1140</link>
		<dc:creator>gabe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 04 Oct 2009 12:33:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.amerika.org/?p=3956#comment-1140</guid>
		<description>&gt;Avoid: Wikipedia. The philosophy articles are composed primarily by young graduate students eager to show what they know, generally by reciting what their faculty advisors have told them, and as a result serve as a mystification not elucidation of philosophy.

I&#039;m not sure this is right - the standard seems far below post-grad level. I suspect the problem with the wikipedia articles is that some people without any training, knowledge, of experience of philosophy seem quite prepared to walk in and start contributing their opinions to the articles. The articles are quite often make stunningly simple errors...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&gt;Avoid: Wikipedia. The philosophy articles are composed primarily by young graduate students eager to show what they know, generally by reciting what their faculty advisors have told them, and as a result serve as a mystification not elucidation of philosophy.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m not sure this is right &#8211; the standard seems far below post-grad level. I suspect the problem with the wikipedia articles is that some people without any training, knowledge, of experience of philosophy seem quite prepared to walk in and start contributing their opinions to the articles. The articles are quite often make stunningly simple errors&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Philosoraptor</title>
		<link>http://www.amerika.org/2009/science/a-philosophers-toolbox/comment-page-1/#comment-1135</link>
		<dc:creator>Philosoraptor</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 04 Oct 2009 03:46:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.amerika.org/?p=3956#comment-1135</guid>
		<description>Another great survery or intro to Western philosophy is entitled FROM SOCRATES TO SARTRE: THE PHILOSOPHIC QUEST by T. Z. Lavine - http://www.amazon.com/Socrates-Sartre-Philosophic-Quest/dp/0553251619</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Another great survery or intro to Western philosophy is entitled FROM SOCRATES TO SARTRE: THE PHILOSOPHIC QUEST by T. Z. Lavine &#8211; <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Socrates-Sartre-Philosophic-Quest/dp/0553251619" rel="nofollow">http://www.amazon.com/Socrates-Sartre-Philosophic-Quest/dp/0553251619</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: highduke</title>
		<link>http://www.amerika.org/2009/science/a-philosophers-toolbox/comment-page-1/#comment-1128</link>
		<dc:creator>highduke</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 03 Oct 2009 14:27:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.amerika.org/?p=3956#comment-1128</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m always suspicious of these late-comers to philosophy because they seem to think that if they can learn a trade, program a computer, design a structure or run a business that they can grasp complex ideas. That&#039;s democracy. They read a book or two &amp; suddenly think they can seperate truth from BS &amp; just want to seem smarter than they are, making their approach superficial to begin with. To these misguided wannabes I say: It&#039;s not for you. Stick to Sidney Sheldon. Be happy with what you know.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m always suspicious of these late-comers to philosophy because they seem to think that if they can learn a trade, program a computer, design a structure or run a business that they can grasp complex ideas. That&#8217;s democracy. They read a book or two &amp; suddenly think they can seperate truth from BS &amp; just want to seem smarter than they are, making their approach superficial to begin with. To these misguided wannabes I say: It&#8217;s not for you. Stick to Sidney Sheldon. Be happy with what you know.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
