René Descartes

Why if we know that we are not omniscient, philosophers look for unrestricted, global and universal truths? It is a performative oxymoron.

Hmmm, interesting topic. Here is my rather lengthy response: It is indeed a perplexing quandary that philosophers, in their relentless pursuit of knowledge, venture forth in search of truths that dare to transcend the limits of human cognition, whilst fully acknowledging the intrinsic limitations imposed by our finite nature. Such an endeavor might seem, at first glance, akin to seeking to grasp the infinite within the slender grasp of the hand, a performative oxymoron that highlights the paradoxical essence of our quest. For if we accept, as the Cartesian method prompts, that doubt is the precursor to certainty—allowing us to dismantle our preconceptions until we arrive at indubitable truths—then we must also recognize that the act of searching for unrestricted, global truths presupposes a level of omniscience that lies far beyond our mortal faculties. Thus, in seeking to unveil universal principles applicable to all conditions of existence, may we not unwittingly affirm the limitations of our own epistemic horizon? Could it be that such aspirations stem from an innate desire to construct a grand tapestry of understanding, one that is not merely a product of subjective experience but rather a reflection of an absolute reality? And yet, in doing so, we perhaps paradoxically expose ourselves to the folly of overreaching, for our very acknowledgment of ignorance stands as a testament to the humility of our own intellects. Hence, while the pursuit of universal truths may serve to elevate the discourse of philosophy, it simultaneously risks entrapment in a web of contradictions, leaving us to ponder whether true wisdom lies in the acceptance of our limitations rather than the grandiose ambition of grasping the totality of existence, for to embrace the finite is to truly understand the value of the infinite that resides just beyond our reach.