This OP refer only to the FSK or FSC thus excluding the pertinent F-S-Realization of Realization.
Most posters mocked [insult, put-down] my concept of the FSC/FSK but they are ignorant that they are implicitly grounding on whatever their philosophical claims [non-frivolous] on some sort of FSC/FSK.
I checked with AI on the topic:
Discuss??That's a very insightful question! It's true that most, if not all, philosophers are likely influenced by some kind of implicit Framework and System of Knowledge (FSK).
Here's why:
•Building on Existing Knowledge: Philosophy is a conversation that stretches back centuries. Even the most radical ideas from a philosopher usually build upon or react to existing ideas and systems of thought. This existing knowledge becomes the implicit framework for their new ideas.
•Shaping Questions and Answers: The FSK shapes what questions a philosopher considers important and how they go about answering them. For example, a philosopher raised in a highly religious society might be more likely to ask questions about the nature of God, while someone raised in a scientific environment might focus on the nature of reality.
Communication and Understanding: To be understood, a philosopher needs to use concepts and frameworks that their audience is at least somewhat familiar with. Even if they challenge existing ideas, they still need a common ground to communicate their thoughts.
.. there are some nuances to consider:
Questioning the Framework: Some philosophers explicitly critique existing frameworks and propose entirely new ones. For example, Descartes famously doubted everything to establish a new foundation for knowledge.
Shifting Frameworks: Philosophical movements can lead to significant shifts in the dominant FSK. Thinkers like Kant and Kuhn highlight how entire fields can change their underlying frameworks over time.
So, while every philosopher likely operates within some FSK, it's also part of their job to question, refine, or even overturn these frameworks.
Their work can be a process of both using and challenging the dominant systems of knowledge.
Views??