Triadic Philosophy Asks: What Difference Does It Make



There is within philosophy a mass of exposition 
of which one might ask
What difference does it make
With the best will in the world
when one is talking about 
how a thinker thought
or how a thinker might think
the burden of the protagonist
should be to answer that question
A difference is the distance between little or none
or 'it has no general significance'
to 'it makes all the difference in the world'
because 'it has an effect on
this or that
and that is worth all this discussion'
A value is placed on relevance

There are many quite radical
applications of this criterion
But my purpose is not to intruduce
a negative element
but rather to hammer away at the issue
of purpose in discourse
Triadic Philosophy argues that
what difference it makes
bumps up against such things as
tolerance
democracy
helpfulness
and
non-idolatry
and that the answer lies 
in a hypothetical resolution
or experimental action
In other words thought itself ought optimally
to have a result 
one that combines truth and beauty
Thought has a social purpose as does life as well 
What difference does it make is a fair question
regardless of what is under discussion

Stephen's Remarkable Kindle Store
Follow Me on Pinterest


Buffer