Philosophy is fiction that tries to pass itself as nonfiction. For an example reread that last sentence. Philosophy is fiction? Says who? But that's just a metaphor, right?

(Don't tell him that his polished abstractions are metaphors, that philosophy is impossible without figurative language. Don't tell him that thought is impossible without figurative language.)

Philosophy and thought are impossible without figurative language, indeed. But is the philosopher always the person introducing the figurative language, or does he work with what he finds?

They can decide to "start from zero" but only belatedness would dream of such a mission.

I'm not following what you mean by belatedness. Is that a technical term of which I'm not aware?

An example of what I mean by belatedness is a rock musician who feels that most or all of the great riffs have been used/claimed. A philosopher-type might be intimidated by all that the tradition already includes.

I would say belatedness is the twin sibling of the "anxiety of influence." For those whose ambition it is to create something both novel and potent, these issues are real. For others they are possibly meaningless or silly.

Thanks for the thoughtful reply. I think the example of riffs is nice. Maybe philosophy is more like jazz. But certainly too much of the music metaphor is misleading.

Philosophy is fiction that tries to pass itself as nonfiction. For an example reread that last sentence. Philosophy is fiction? Says who? But that's just a metaphor, right?

All our hopes are tropes. Homer will tell you a Greek story. A philosopher will tell you the universal story. His story is true for all. Because he says it is and we want to believe him. He dreams of awakening mankind. He hopes to convince us that we can transcend hope and fear. Or he hopes to help us transcend these hopes we have to transcend all the time.

He will tell us a story that gives us certainty, a warm gooey feeling. Or He wants to make us certain that certainty is not so important after all. Sometimes he tells us about the greatness of our tribe, that our tribe must conquer/liberate the world. Other times he tells us that our tribe is just the worst, that we must learn to hate our tribe, in order to purify it.

Remember, all these stories are true (crosses his chest). I'm definitely not a poet or a dreamer! If I use metaphors they just for the imbeciles who need light like the rest. (Don't tell him that his polished abstractions are metaphors, that philosophy is impossible without figurative language. Don't tell him that thought is impossible without figurative language.)

I find huge difference in what a child can manufacture of thoughts, what a naive ignorent person can make up, and what a highly educated can.

Not all are philosophers with a baseknowledge of superstition and roumers. Do you even know the concept of double blind test?

If you plan on attacking my intelligence, use a spellchecker. It'll sting more.

What I'm searching for is your handling of principles and I can't see what your principles has to do with my spelling or lack hereof.