Just what is Philosophy, anyway?

There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
Post Reply
jj_appelbaum

Just what is Philosophy, anyway?

Post by jj_appelbaum »

For my first post at OTNOT, I thought this would be a fun topic. While I don't necessarily agree with the author's every line, I do consider him a fair cop.

Just what is Philosophy, anyway?

Here as a set of concluding remarks , I offer a view of what Philosophy itself is and what it isn't. We'll start with what it isn't and attempt to dispel some common misunderstandings and misuses of the word.

Philosophy is not a "Way of Life" . Every person does not have his or her own "Philosophy". Philosophy is not simply a theory about something. Nor is Philosophy a belief or a wish. Philosophy is an activity: a quest after wisdom. Philosophy is an activity of thought. Philosophy is a particular unique type of thought or style of thinking. Philosophy is not to be confused with its product. What a philosopher provides is a body of philosophic thought NOT a Philosophy. A philosopher enacts a Philosophy, a quest after wisdom.

Philosophy is not a picking and choosing what body of thought one would like to call one's own or would like to believe in; a choice based upon personal preferences or feelings. Philosophy is a pursuit. One can choose to be philosophical. One can choose to be a philosopher. One can NOT choose a Philosophy. Philosophy, insofar as it may be correlated at all to a "way of Life", is a form of thinking meant to guide action or to prescribe a way of life. The philosophic way of life , if there is one, is displayed in a life in which action is held to be best directed when philosophical reflection has provided that direction; e.g., SOCRATES the paradigm of a philosopher.

Philosophy is an activity of thought, a type of thinking. Philosophy is critical and comprehensive thought, the most critical and comprehensive manner of thinking which the human species has yet devised. This intellectual process includes both an analytic and synthetic mode of operation. Philosophy as a critical and comprehensive process of thought involves resolving confusion, unmasking assumptions, revealing presuppositions, distinguishing importance, testing positions, correcting distortions, looking for reasons, examining world-views and questioning conceptual frameworks. It also includes dispelling ignorance, enriching understanding, broadening experience, expanding horizons, developing imagination , controlling emotion, exploring values, fixing beliefs by rational inquiry, establishing habits of acting, widening considerations, synthesizing knowledge and questing for wisdom.

Philosophy as a process functions as an activity which responds to society's demand for wisdom, which is bringing together all that we know in order to obtain what we value. Viewed in this way Philosophy is part of the activity of human growth and thus an integral, essential part of the process of education. Philosophy and education have as a common goal the development of the total intellect of a person, the realization of the human potential.

What type of thought is Philosophy?

Philosophy is thought which is critical and comprehensive

analytic and synthetic

practical and theoretical

logical and empirical



Philosophy is thought which is CRITICAL, i.e.

i)it attempts to criticize assumptions, meanings, word usages, beliefs, and theories.



ii) it attempts to develop clear definitions and formulations of propositions and to retain maximum precision in expression.



iii) it holds the LOGICAL criteria of consistency and coherency to be valuable

consistency

1 without contradiction

2 each term has univocal meaning

3 meanings of terms don't vary between passages



coherency - that the terms and phrases have meaning in

relation to one another within a single framework of

thought. Terms are not totally reducible to others and

not meaningful without reference to others.



iv) it holds the EMPIRICAL criteria of adequacy and applicability



adequacy- that all that is given in experience is

accounted for within an analysis or explanation.



applicability- that there does not exist anything in the

explanation that has no referent to some element in

experience.

v) it is COMPREHENSIVE in attempting to address social and human problems reflective inquiry must come to bear on a wide range of affairs with a critical eye that is unwavering.

As on issue leads into another, as reality as experienced is One, so too is thought about such actual human affairs revelatory of the interconnection of issues and the underlying unity. Such thought attempts to show how the principles of explanation and basic categories of any conceptual schema are applicable throughout the breadth and depth of human experience. Such Philosophic thought at its most abstract levels reveals the basic insights into every area of life.

vi) Philosophic thought is SYNTHETIC insofar as it attempts to relate and coordinate all the knowledge the sciences provide with the values revealed in the production of the humanities. Such philosophic thought attempts to develop a concordance of ideas, values and distinctions in order to answer fundamental questions and to present the most critically formulated conceptual framework and world-view with which all subsequent thought would work and help to evaluate and reformulate.

vii) Philosophy is PRACTICAL, insofar as the method of inquiry can be put to use solving practical questions but even more so it is practical when the practice one seeks to activate is solution of problems that have resulted from the inadequacies of the practical-common sense approach to life. It is at such times that the most truly practical thing to have is a theory. Theories help to analyze, explain, and assist in planning. At such times it becomes practical to question assumptions, beliefs, current presuppositions, common sense, ideas and the efficacy of current practices and it is only from the perspective of philosophic thought that such an inquiry can take place.

viii) Philosophic thought is SPECULATIVE in pursuing questions that do not bear directly on practical matters AT FIRST SIGHT. It is speculative in considering problems which only highly abstract thought presents. It is speculative in developing truly presbyopic perspectives and concerns. It is speculative in considering ultimate metaphysical issues, pursuing the most critical formulation of principles held to govern thought and action, and furthering mathematical and logical inquiry in its attempt to further the progress of human thought and the improvement of the human condition.
More, and a link to follow when it's appropriate for new members to post links.

Enjoy!

jj
jj_appelbaum

Re: Just what is Philosophy, anyway?

Post by jj_appelbaum »

Philosophy and Cultural Differences

Different individuals have different perspectives. Existing within a definite time-space location, they share in the basic wealth of a given culture. They participate in the process of civilization. They have been in part determined in what they will think and do by what is at their disposal to work with and what has gone before to make them what they are. Individuals add to their inheritance their own uniqueness which is centered in their valuational acts.

Philosophers are no different from others in regard to their cultural perspectives. Philosophers differ in their conclusions. They build upon what has come before. They react to it and criticize it. They draw from the total wealth of their given civilization and all others they have knowledge of. Philosophers differ in what they end up with, however, they share in a common pursuit and they do so by their attempt to pursue inquiry in a definite manner, i.e. a critical and comprehensive approach.

Philosophy and other forms of Thought

While the Philosophical mode of thought exists along side of those of Religion, Science and Art it is distinct from them and influences each of them and in part responds to developments within each of these fields or dimensions of human experience. While Religion offers a comprehensive view of all aspects of human life , it is a view which is uncritically formulated and does not itself encourage or tolerate criticism of the fundamental tenets of faith or the principle applications of those basic beliefs to the affairs of everyday life. Science, on the other hand, is quite critical in the evaluation of hypotheses and theories but it lacks the comprehensive nature of philosophic thought. The various branches of scientific inquiry have not as yet demonstrated that they are capable of being welded into a single comprehensive view of all reality built upon a single coherent set of basic principles or laws. Art remains as a discipline capable of demonstrating, representing and encouraging values but it is not a discipline of thought at all least of all one that is characterized by the critical and comprehensive features of philosophical thought.

I hope that you have been able to detect these features of philosophic thought although there are obstacles that most of you have encountered such as (1) the brevity of the treatment given each philosopher examined during this semester, (2) the rather small number of passages and works read and (3) the inexperience of class members with reading and analyzing philosophical treatises. Even so each student should have come to appreciate that Philosophy as an activity and a tradition of thought involves a good deal more than the common usage of the term in popular discourse would intimate.

Today the term "Philosophy" is often misused. So often in fact that the term itself has been corrupted. Most think of Philosophy as a "way of life", "view of the world", "theory about life", etc... The public has little conscious appreciation for the philosophic tradition.

The future for Philosophy as an intellectual activity has come to be in doubt due to present social conditions: the anti-intellectual and anti-rational tendencies that characterize the current cultural scene and most of the influential and determining social and political movements within it..

There are over 20,000 philosophers in the world. There are more than 6,000 philosophers in the United States. They are philosophers according to their academic training and degree and their professional affiliations, e.g. membership in the American Philosophical Association. There are Philosophers who participate in different traditions. (1) Analytical Philosophy which was quite popular at the middle of the twentieth century offered an approach to problems through linguistic analysis, in which all problems are seen as problems of language: questions of semantics . This approach alone, while promising much and necessary for inquiry, has not answered many of our most important problems. (2) Social Philosophy in the tradition of Socrates, Plato, and Dewey still has many participants. There are many definite characteristics of this tradition in the works of Marxists, Existentialists, and Pragmatists. (3) Applied Philosophy in the forms of Applied Ethics, Philosophy and Public Affairs and Political Philosophy has a growing number of participants as societies around the globe call upon those skilled in analytical and critical thinking to sort through the confusion wrought by the breathtaking speed of technological developments and the failure of contemporary thought to keep pace with them applying the values held by each society. Finally, there is still if even in only the smallest of numbers (4) speculative Philosophy such as evidenced in this country by Peirce, Whitehead, Hartshorne, and Weiss. Philosophy in the grand style of Plato, Aristotle, Descartes, Kant and Hegel. Philosophy evolving an entire worldview and all encompassing conceptual framework: Philosophy in its most comprehensive form of thought.

Critical and comprehensive thinking continues to be carried on today but toward what end???

Our contemporary world is what it is partly as a result of past philosophical inquiry. Consider the impact and importance of Greek thought for mathematics, modern science and technology.

Much of our world has come to be the way it is as a result of the world-views developed by philosophers and criticized and reformulated by philosophers and most of these thinkers were Hellenized-Christians, in fact DWEM's!!

Part of our contemporary dilemma is the inappropriateness of such traditional, even classical, world-views in the light of recent scientific advances in knowledge. In our present state not only the moral ends and hierarchy of values that accompanied such world-views have become dislodged but also the very notion of what thought can do for a society or a civilization. Philosophers have surely contributed to the current situation being what it is and they shall contribute to whatever direction thought is to take in the immediate future as humans continue to grapple with the perennial issues and the most basic questions humans must answer. These issues and questions have been, are now, and, for some time to come, will continue to be associated with Philosophy.

Philosophers spend a good deal of time in reflection upon these basic issues. They produce ideas, at times strange ideas. Over time however, the ideas of Philosophers have changed the course of human events all over the planet. Sometimes their ideas move quickly into the mainstream of human culture and produce consequences in art, politics, religion and the political, social and private lives of human beings. Sometimes their ideas move more slowly and only after centuries do they emerge through the thought and work of others to produce profound consequences. Whether it is Plato and his distrust of the senses and the importance of quantitative measurement or Peirce and his pragmatic approach to meaning and truth their ideas emerge in the foundations of Mathematics and Science and in the post modern movements, respectively. Their ideas have changed the world. Whether it is Socrates refusal to leave prison and to stay and die for principles or Karl Marx and his notions of the classless society, Philosophers have altered the course of human history.

Some say" Philosophy bakes no bread." meaning that Philosophy has no practical relevance or value to the actual affairs of this world. It could be said in response to this critique that were it not for Philosophy little bread would be baked, for bakers need reasons, motives, purposes in their lives. If survival is the only end or purpose then little is accounted for in the history of the human species. We as human beings seem compelled to ask the question "survival for what?" If there are other ends it is in philosophic inquiry that they are distinctly discerned criticized and related to human affairs. Purposes, values may be presented in numerous ways (religion, and art are the best known) but they are understood philosophically. Philosophy seeks after clear enunciation of purpose and values and precise formulation without which human beings encounter a void, feel lost-without purpose or meaning, without a sense of place, without a relation to the rest of the universe.

So, Philosophy is an activity of thought, which may become a way of life. It is primarily a pursuit after wisdom. It is a critical and comprehensive inquiry into the ways in which what we know can be used to obtain what we value. Philosophy is one of the most, if not THE most, distinctive of all human activities, as such Philosophy has been and may continue to be of importance in the live of humans, around the world.
From a lecture series available at: http://www.qcc.cuny.edu/socialsciences/ ... osophy.htm
Simple Minded

Re: Just what is Philosophy, anyway?

Post by Simple Minded »

JJ,

Thanks for posting. :D The author really covers the spectrum, doesn't he? I can agree with about 1/3 of his sentences, I would edit 1/3, and I think (feel?) he is dead wrong in 1/3 of his sentences. In other words, he and I are typical human beings.

I think "philosophy" gets redefined by someone somewhere approximately every 134.72 milliseconds.

We are all better at broadcasting than receiving, though we often think the reverse....... ;)

IMSMO, philosophy should be "fun." Try defining that term......

Beware the philospher who seeks consensus. They are perenially unhappy individuals, and for good reason. Vanity sucks!

To achieve more equanimity, assume lack of reply means lack of time or focus on the part of the reader, not lack of approval of what they may or may not have read or understood or mis-understood. :)

Enjoy life.
User avatar
Skin Job
Posts: 255
Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2012 12:45 am

Re: Just what is Philosophy, anyway?

Post by Skin Job »

Semantic exercises such as this are disheartening; they constitute a sorry admission of the total inadequacy of human language to accurately convey concepts.
jj_appelbaum

Re: Just what is Philosophy, anyway?

Post by jj_appelbaum »

The text is part of the online version of a class at Queens Community College, New York:

http://www.qcc.cuny.edu/socialsciences/ ... efault.htm
jj_appelbaum

Re: Just what is Philosophy, anyway?

Post by jj_appelbaum »

Simple Minded wrote:JJ,

Thanks for posting. :D The author really covers the spectrum, doesn't he? I can agree with about 1/3 of his sentences, I would edit 1/3, and I think (feel?) he is dead wrong in 1/3 of his sentences. In other words, he and I are typical human beings.

I think "philosophy" gets redefined by someone somewhere approximately every 134.72 milliseconds.

We are all better at broadcasting than receiving, though we often think the reverse....... ;)

IMSMO, philosophy should be "fun." Try defining that term......

Beware the philospher who seeks consensus. They are perenially unhappy individuals, and for good reason. Vanity sucks!

To achieve more equanimity, assume lack of reply means lack of time or focus on the part of the reader, not lack of approval of what they may or may not have read or understood or mis-understood. :)

Enjoy life.
Thank you! 8-)

The author of the online textbook is a tenured department head at a publicly-funded community college with an enrollment of over 100,000 students. He's found a way to make it pay. :lol:

You? Me? Not so much... :cry:
Simple Minded

Re: Just what is Philosophy, anyway?

Post by Simple Minded »

jj_appelbaum wrote:
Simple Minded wrote:JJ,

Thanks for posting. :D The author really covers the spectrum, doesn't he? I can agree with about 1/3 of his sentences, I would edit 1/3, and I think (feel?) he is dead wrong in 1/3 of his sentences. In other words, he and I are typical human beings.

I think "philosophy" gets redefined by someone somewhere approximately every 134.72 milliseconds.

We are all better at broadcasting than receiving, though we often think the reverse....... ;)

IMSMO, philosophy should be "fun." Try defining that term......

Beware the philospher who seeks consensus. They are perenially unhappy individuals, and for good reason. Vanity sucks!

To achieve more equanimity, assume lack of reply means lack of time or focus on the part of the reader, not lack of approval of what they may or may not have read or understood or mis-understood. :)

Enjoy life.
Thank you! 8-)

The author of the online textbook is a tenured department head at a publicly-funded community college with an enrollment of over 100,000 students. He's found a way to make it pay. :lol:

You? Me? Not so much... :cry:

You are more than welcome. ;)

The beauty of the information age is one can cast an infinitely wide net at the speed of light. Kudos to the author. Where would we be without people who can capitalize on change?

One can have 1,000s or 1,000,000s of followers, all of whom think they agree with/disagree with/misunderstand/understand you, but neither you nor any of them really know with any degree of certainty.

Serial posters need to follow the same rules as forecasters, "If you can't forecast (post) well, forecast (post) often!" Like a stopped clock, sooner or later your perspectives will become acceptable fashion once more. A big audience often equates to a sense of self-worth for many.

Deep question: What is more useless than a miserable philosopher? :lol:
jj_appelbaum

Re: Just what is Philosophy, anyway?

Post by jj_appelbaum »

Simple Minded wrote:
jj_appelbaum wrote:
Simple Minded wrote:JJ,

Thanks for posting. :D The author really covers the spectrum, doesn't he? I can agree with about 1/3 of his sentences, I would edit 1/3, and I think (feel?) he is dead wrong in 1/3 of his sentences. In other words, he and I are typical human beings.

I think "philosophy" gets redefined by someone somewhere approximately every 134.72 milliseconds.

We are all better at broadcasting than receiving, though we often think the reverse....... ;)

IMSMO, philosophy should be "fun." Try defining that term......

Beware the philospher who seeks consensus. They are perenially unhappy individuals, and for good reason. Vanity sucks!

To achieve more equanimity, assume lack of reply means lack of time or focus on the part of the reader, not lack of approval of what they may or may not have read or understood or mis-understood. :)

Enjoy life.
Thank you! 8-)

The author of the online textbook is a tenured department head at a publicly-funded community college with an enrollment of over 100,000 students. He's found a way to make it pay. :lol:

You? Me? Not so much... :cry:

You are more than welcome. ;)

The beauty of the information age is one can cast an infinitely wide net at the speed of light. Kudos to the author. Where would we be without people who can capitalize on change?

One can have 1,000s or 1,000,000s of followers, all of whom think they agree with/disagree with/misunderstand/understand you, but neither you nor any of them really know with any degree of certainty.

Serial posters need to follow the same rules as forecasters, "If you can't forecast (post) well, forecast (post) often!" Like a stopped clock, sooner or later your perspectives will become acceptable fashion once more. A big audience often equates to a sense of self-worth for many.

Deep question: What is more useless than a miserable philosopher? :lol:

Someone who comes to a Philosophy forum to expouse a philosophy of disdain for philosophic thinking? :lol:
User avatar
Nonc Hilaire
Posts: 6168
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2011 1:28 am

Re: Just what is Philosophy, anyway?

Post by Nonc Hilaire »

jj_appelbaum wrote:
Someone who comes to a Philosophy forum to expouse a philosophy of disdain for philosophic thinking? :lol:
There are differences in philosophic thinking. Arisrotelian/Thomistic logic or that of Averroes or Al-Ghazzali is based on truth. Modern philosophy agrees to substitute the falsity of the argumentative equality of phenomena/phenomenon, which is decisively erroneous. Logic cannot be applied to man-made concepts; only to reality.

The definition of truth reigns.
“Christ has no body now but yours. Yours are the eyes through which he looks with compassion on this world. Yours are the feet with which he walks among His people to do good. Yours are the hands through which he blesses His creation.”

Teresa of Ávila
jj_appelbaum

Re: Just what is Philosophy, anyway?

Post by jj_appelbaum »

Nonc Hilaire wrote:
jj_appelbaum wrote:
Someone who comes to a Philosophy forum to expouse a philosophy of disdain for philosophic thinking? :lol:
There are differences in philosophic thinking. Arisrotelian/Thomistic logic or that of Averroes or Al-Ghazzali is based on truth. Modern philosophy agrees to substitute the falsity of the argumentative equality of phenomena/phenomenon, which is decisively erroneous. Logic cannot be applied to man-made concepts; only to reality.

The definition of truth reigns.
What do you mean by "the argumentative equality of phenomena/phenomenon"?
Simple Minded

Re: Just what is Philosophy, anyway?

Post by Simple Minded »

jj_appelbaum wrote:
Someone who comes to a Philosophy forum to expouse a philosophy of disdain for philosophic thinking? :lol:
:lol: :lol:

Outstanding! Exactly what I mean when I say philosophy should be fun! I salute you!

You even formatted the answer correctly... as a question, cause all good philosophers know you never answer a question except with another question.

I have no disdain for philosophic thinking, it is the source of all that makes life enjoyable. Only amusement with those who think their infinitely limited perspective is the "correct one."

We are all blind men describing elephants......IMSMO... Our "certainty" is often fleeting.
User avatar
Nonc Hilaire
Posts: 6168
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2011 1:28 am

Re: Just what is Philosophy, anyway?

Post by Nonc Hilaire »

jj_appelbaum wrote:
Nonc Hilaire wrote:
jj_appelbaum wrote:
Someone who comes to a Philosophy forum to expouse a philosophy of disdain for philosophic thinking? :lol:
There are differences in philosophic thinking. Arisrotelian/Thomistic logic or that of Averroes or Al-Ghazzali is based on truth. Modern philosophy agrees to substitute the falsity of the argumentative equality of phenomena/phenomenon, which is decisively erroneous. Logic cannot be applied to man-made concepts; only to reality.

The definition of truth reigns.
What do you mean by "the argumentative equality of phenomena/phenomenon"?
Thank you for catching my error. I screwed up my post. I meant phenomena/noumenon.
“Christ has no body now but yours. Yours are the eyes through which he looks with compassion on this world. Yours are the feet with which he walks among His people to do good. Yours are the hands through which he blesses His creation.”

Teresa of Ávila
jj_appelbaum

Re: Just what is Philosophy, anyway?

Post by jj_appelbaum »

Nonc Hilaire wrote:
jj_appelbaum wrote:
Nonc Hilaire wrote:
jj_appelbaum wrote:
Someone who comes to a Philosophy forum to expouse a philosophy of disdain for philosophic thinking? :lol:
There are differences in philosophic thinking. Arisrotelian/Thomistic logic or that of Averroes or Al-Ghazzali is based on truth. Modern philosophy agrees to substitute the falsity of the argumentative equality of phenomena/phenomenon, which is decisively erroneous. Logic cannot be applied to man-made concepts; only to reality.

The definition of truth reigns.
What do you mean by "the argumentative equality of phenomena/phenomenon"?
Thank you for catching my error. I screwed up my post. I meant phenomena/noumenon.

"Modern philosophy agrees to substitute the falsity of the argumentative equality of phenomena/noumenon, which is decisively erroneous."


I think you still have a lot of disambiguating to do if you'd like to defend scholastic prose poetry coherently. Philosophy has grown up quite a bit in the last few centuries. :lol:
User avatar
Nonc Hilaire
Posts: 6168
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2011 1:28 am

Re: Just what is Philosophy, anyway?

Post by Nonc Hilaire »

jj_appelbaum wrote:I think you still have a lot of disambiguating to do if you'd like to defend scholastic prose poetry coherently. Philosophy has grown up quite a bit in the last few centuries. :lol:
Disambiguate what? If you are going to apply logic, a thing must be physically demonstrable. I'm not a philosopher, but I do know if you try to stuff artificial concepts into syllogisms you get word play and not fact.
“Christ has no body now but yours. Yours are the eyes through which he looks with compassion on this world. Yours are the feet with which he walks among His people to do good. Yours are the hands through which he blesses His creation.”

Teresa of Ávila
jj_appelbaum

Re: Just what is Philosophy, anyway?

Post by jj_appelbaum »

Nonc Hilaire wrote:
jj_appelbaum wrote:I think you still have a lot of disambiguating to do if you'd like to defend scholastic prose poetry coherently. Philosophy has grown up quite a bit in the last few centuries. :lol:
Disambiguate what? If you are going to apply logic, a thing must be physically demonstrable. I'm not a philosopher, but I do know if you try to stuff artificial concepts into syllogisms you get word play and not fact.
Can you demonstrate what you mean?
User avatar
Nonc Hilaire
Posts: 6168
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2011 1:28 am

Re: Just what is Philosophy, anyway?

Post by Nonc Hilaire »

jj_appelbaum wrote:
Nonc Hilaire wrote:
jj_appelbaum wrote:I think you still have a lot of disambiguating to do if you'd like to defend scholastic prose poetry coherently. Philosophy has grown up quite a bit in the last few centuries. :lol:
Disambiguate what? If you are going to apply logic, a thing must be physically demonstrable. I'm not a philosopher, but I do know if you try to stuff artificial concepts into syllogisms you get word play and not fact.
Can you demonstrate what you mean?
The Correspondence Theory of Truth.

The easiest demonstration I can think of is post-modernism. It seems to be simply turning the phenomena/noumea telescope around and looking through the other end. In the first case the existence of truth is missed entirely and logic narrows and eventually vanishes into nihilism, while in the other everything is true seen through some viewpoint so let's all have lifetime job security for philosophy professors.
“Christ has no body now but yours. Yours are the eyes through which he looks with compassion on this world. Yours are the feet with which he walks among His people to do good. Yours are the hands through which he blesses His creation.”

Teresa of Ávila
Simple Minded

Re: Just what is Philosophy, anyway?

Post by Simple Minded »

Nonc Hilaire wrote:
jj_appelbaum wrote:I think you still have a lot of disambiguating to do if you'd like to defend scholastic prose poetry coherently. Philosophy has grown up quite a bit in the last few centuries. :lol:
Disambiguate what? If you are going to apply logic, a thing must be physically demonstrable. I'm not a philosopher, but I do know if you try to stuff artificial concepts into syllogisms you get word play and not fact.
You don't give yourself enough credit here Nonc, every human being I have ever met is a philosopher.
User avatar
Nonc Hilaire
Posts: 6168
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2011 1:28 am

Re: Just what is Philosophy, anyway?

Post by Nonc Hilaire »

Simple Minded wrote:
Nonc Hilaire wrote:
jj_appelbaum wrote:I think you still have a lot of disambiguating to do if you'd like to defend scholastic prose poetry coherently. Philosophy has grown up quite a bit in the last few centuries. :lol:
Disambiguate what? If you are going to apply logic, a thing must be physically demonstrable. I'm not a philosopher, but I do know if you try to stuff artificial concepts into syllogisms you get word play and not fact.
You don't give yourself enough credit here Nonc, every human being I have ever met is a philosopher.
Image
“Christ has no body now but yours. Yours are the eyes through which he looks with compassion on this world. Yours are the feet with which he walks among His people to do good. Yours are the hands through which he blesses His creation.”

Teresa of Ávila
Simple Minded

Re: Just what is Philosophy, anyway?

Post by Simple Minded »

Nonc Hilaire wrote: Image
:D :D Outstanding!! Thank you Nonc!!

Gotta get rid of the ear buds though, for this to be serious reflective time.......

Reflective time seems rare in today's communication saturated world, people seem the worse for it......
Farcus

Re: Just what is Philosophy, anyway?

Post by Farcus »

Simple Minded wrote:
Nonc Hilaire wrote: Image
:D :D Outstanding!! Thank you Nonc!!

Gotta get rid of the ear buds though, for this to be serious reflective time.......

Reflective time seems rare in today's communication saturated world, people seem the worse for it......
Even back in the good ol days they had places for people to just sit around and think Great Thoughts by themselves...
Image

Image
Post Reply