The problem with writing truth-based philosophy is how very often I find myself obliged to write about how much, and in what ways words—words about things, words to form ideas—don’t matter, at least not remotely as much as people think. There are perhaps far fewer ways they do matter. There are select ways to make words matter, and those all depend on carrying through, and doing things other than words.
If I were a better liar, like Plato, I could make a more grandiose place for my chosen profession. If I could dissimulate, like an academic… well, you know.
Err… philosophy—it’s the best hope we have? Yes, that’s pretty much the size of it. We resort to words for a reason, and the fundamentals cause all manner of havoc if they aren’t resolved. But an unassuming defense of words talking about ideas also explains the desire to obfuscate more than a few matters in order to play the great and powerful Professor Oz (with tenure).
There is a reason why Nietzsche inducted art into philosophy along with science; of this we are more able to become proud, and find a place for an inspiring, grand and humanistic Philosophy again. Splitting the same hairs since Plato should hardly crown a philosopher-king, should it?