This post relates to the argument type associated with appealing to the stated observations and opinions of experts. This type of argument is used in the text we were asked to read this week. Paul Bishop spends considerable effort relating to the arguments of the German Romantic philosophers identified in his writing. However, early on in chapter seven we are warned of the lure of using the impressions of previous experts in an effort to make an argument. With the warning in mind, we delve into the use of said experts by Bishop. The use of experts is extensive and contains some notable greats from across vast timelines.
Name dropping begins early in the article. We see that the list contains Schopenhauer, Nietzsche, Eschenmayer, Passavant,
…show more content…
One way to put this is “One of the more gratifying” as Firestein goes on to say “pleasures of actually doing science is proving someone wrong— even yourself at an earlier time” (Firestein, 2012, p. 21). Remarkably, this is not the case with the article in question. We see in the article that the author is willing to make leaps in order to portray Jung as a student of Schelling. Even though he admits to Jung not listing Schelling in his work “From the list of names mentioned in Memories, Dreams, Reflections, one would appear to be missing” (Bishop, 2012, p. 336). Even with this statement, the author takes liberties with the accounts of Jung’s influence by Schelling through passages found in his writing. The article takes on the German Idealism and influences by Schelling in the section called Jung and Schelling (Bishop, 2012, p. 337). The arguments made in this section relates to the location in other texts that describe the relationship that these influential people had with Schelling’s ideas on such topics as the unconscious. In reading the sections contents we find that comments regarding the subtle references to Schelling and other German thinkers abound. We are then asked to understand the issues and subtleties between the philosophies of these