Tenken

every time I read someone else's writings, I feel like no one has ever ruthlessly questioned the value of what they were saying. I'm all for critiquing anything and everything, but it seems like no one ever gets to this point about value, or if they do, they never present enough of a solution to the problems they pose.

I feel this way about any number of supposedly intellectual views people traditionally espouse, but it's especially true for a few I see constantly popping up on the internet.

1. I feel that way about most of the new atheism wave (does a meme really help explain away the rise of religion?)
2. I feel that way about the Austrian school of economics and their capital theory (what else should business owners do if government manipulation of interest rates make them unreliable? How do we modify our current financial valuation methods like net present value?)
3. and even about feminism (I can accept a patriarchy exists, but I'm not sure how you begin to combat it, what does combating it actually entail and help?)

Of the three above, I would tend to give feminists the most credit because most people who write on it try to answer the question about "what is the value in what I'm saying." But I'm still left wondering at points why people don't bother answering these fundamental questions. Why should I care? What's the value in what you're telling me? Is there a workable solution?

I love reading critiques, because there's still some value in questioning anything and everything (you can learn of problems you didn't know existed). But at the end of the day, I feel any philosophy worth it's muster has to answer the question about what value it brings to the table.