Clownification

Clownification is the process by which philosophers become clowns.  They become so enamored of their ideas that they attribute to them a reality that has no basis in fact.  Take for instance Aristotle's metaphysics, in particular their emphasis on form and matter.  All things consist of matter (the physical stuff things are made of) and form (their shape).  Brilliant ideas and also attempts to correct Plato's overemphasis on forms, which become a world of ideas.  As I recall, Aristotle believed in the primacy of the particular; i.e. forms did not have any independent existence outside of physical things.  In any event, Aristotle became so enamored of his metaphysics (metaphysics is supposedly the foundation for physics) that he attempted to apply these ideas to biology.   He asserted that during reproduction, the male provided the form while the female provided the matter.  Way off!!
Kierkegaard leveled similar criticism at Hegel.  While Hegel's descriptions of spirit were inventive and obviously insightful, when he asserted that spirit was real, he became a clown.   Similar criticisms can be leveled at Marx, the logical atomists, early Wittgenstein, many existentialists and probably most philosophers.
And of course it can be leveled at my attempt to apply the "and" and "or" to all that is.  Certainly, there is a naiviety to my descriptions of early man, and his supposedly ideal relationship with nature.  Early man's preoccupation was with food and shelter.  He probably spent a great deal of time thinking about how he would get his next meal and devising schemes to extract it from the world around him, rather than worshipping the trees.  No doubt he probably did have a more intimate relationship to the natural world than most of us.