tibility of their philosophies with what is considered to be established scientific fact. For instance, Plato¡¯s theory of forms does not, to me, seem to jibe with modern physics and cosmology. And although I can only vaguely glimpse the psychology which underlies Kant, it seems to be highly questionable.

¡¡¡¡(43) .

¡¡¡¡(44) . History is, of course, necessary to any understanding of a philosophy: how it came about, what people did with it, etc. Sartre, although he developed some of his ideas from Nietzsche and Kierkegaard, probably could not have expounded those same ideas of existentialism in their times; Nietzsche, who popularized the idea that ¡°God is dead¡±, could not have written in the time of Descartes; and Descartes could not have expressed his radically individualist ideas during the time of Plato.

¡¡¡¡I suppose that my point, which I am being exceedingly longª²winded about, is that philosophy does not (and should not, and must not) stand apart from the rest of the sciences. (45) . Although the other sciences can provide us with data, observations, and theories, only philosophy can integrate those into a coherent whole, tell us what to do with them, or provide a meaningful context for using these facts in our daily lives.

¡¡¡¡[A] In my view, application of Kant¡¯s epistemology and metaphysics could never produce an artificial intelligence capable of passing a Turing test.

¡¡¡¡ Rather, philosophy should be integrated with the rest of the sciences through a method of rational judgment. Rather than sailing behind, or next to but away from, the rest of the sciences, Philosophy should be the flagship of the group.

¡¡¡¡[C] And many of the philosophers who have existed over the course of the centuries have necessarily had to worry about governmental, church, or societal disapproval, censorship, or punishment.

¡¡¡¡[D] After all, physics can give us insights into metaphysics, since both seek different ways to do the same thing; psychology, sociology, anthropology, and archeology can give us insights into epistemology; various ¡°soft¡± sciences dealing with comparative cultures can provide food for thought in ethnics, and so on.

¡¡¡¡[E] Although some philosophical people are not necessarily considered as philosophers today£¬whose work was influential and instrumental in developing one of the social sciences ( psychology, sociology, political science, education) or in advancing theoretical science (what is now called philosophy of science).

¡¡¡¡[F] And so, it seems to me, the best way that a philosopher can keep from being dated is to be aware of scientific knowledge, and integrate it into philosophy. Of course, this necessitates an independent evaluation of the merits and drawbacks of a given scientific idea, which necessitates, in turn, a thorough knowledge of that theory.

¡¡¡¡[G] And so, it seems to me that, in order for a philosopher to be relevant for the future as well as the present, he must take into account

ÔðÈα༭:gaoyan