Dear Britta,
Regarding your point about Heidegger I propose a thought experiment. Let us
imagine a scientist discovers a cure for cancer but is also known for being
a neo-nazi. Should we follow the imagined scientist’s discovery and save
millions? Or should we ignore it?
The work is all that matters, if it’s useful it should be put to use, if
it’s not, not.
Of course the answer is simple in a case of life or death such as cancer
research. But I suggest the ideas trump character rule should be followed
as a matter of principle, also because we cannot determine with absolute
certainty beforehand which ideas/discoveries will be useful; further, in
less extreme cases (i.e. if, instead of a neo-nazi, we are dealing with a
bit of an obnoxious prick) the matter of moral purity is unmanageable since
we would never find anyone morally pure and thus all research would go to
waste.
In the specific case of Heidegger, I'm fairly confident the world could go
on just as well without the concept of Dasein.
Best,
João
--
João Ferreira
REDES - Research & Education in Design
Universidade de Lisboa, Faculdade de Arquitetura, CIAUD
00351 967 089 437
[log in to unmask]
[log in to unmask]
-----------------------------------------------------------------
PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]>
Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design
Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|