To what extent can creativity woven with logic supplant other philosophers' works in creating the meat?

...of philosophical work?





Or should the nature of ';philosophical discussions'; necessarily make heavy references to philosophical works? If a topic progresses without references to existing philosophical works on the matter, is the discussion then not ever reaching philosophical substance? Is creative thinking and use of logic merely playing in the sandbox if no reference to philosophical works?To what extent can creativity woven with logic supplant other philosophers' works in creating the meat?
American League; National League. Why not?





I enjoy re-inventing the wheel; I do not think it wasted effort.





But that 're-inventing the wheel' accusation is among the objections you're likely to hear to your (implicit) program proposal. You'll also hear accusations of 'sophistry,' and 'omphaloskepsis.' Just throw some navel lint at 'em, and go back to home-sweet-barrel.





Philosophy has no owner.





Authority is held on loan, and can be revoked at any time. This applies to the authority of logic, too; a lot of philosophers forget that one.





Carry on with your program. Do you really care that some might disparage your activity? Why?To what extent can creativity woven with logic supplant other philosophers' works in creating the meat?
It's quite clear that philosophy cannot progress without throwing off the shackles of previous thinkers; the only problem is that philosophy has enjoyed such a wide discourse through history that any 'new' theory is difficult to construct.





I think this is why our post modern philosophers have theorised on vague concepts such as surveillance, pornography and suicide- concepts that should be left to the social sciences.