Is Philosophy Still The Friend Of Wisdom?
-
Philosophy Now
- Posts: 1330
- Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2010 8:49 am
Is Philosophy Still The Friend Of Wisdom?
Each answer below receives a book. Apologies to the many entrants not included. Thanks to Finn Janning for suggesting this month’s question.
https://philosophynow.org/issues/131/Is_Philosophy_Still_The_Friend_Of_Wisdom
https://philosophynow.org/issues/131/Is_Philosophy_Still_The_Friend_Of_Wisdom
Re: Is Philosophy Still The Friend Of Wisdom?
Philosophy is the love of wisdom, by conventional wisdom and by philosophical preference.
Can a love be a friend? My lover is my best friend, but she ain't no philosophy, and I ain't no wiser for her love.
Okay, where is my book.
Can a love be a friend? My lover is my best friend, but she ain't no philosophy, and I ain't no wiser for her love.
Okay, where is my book.
Re: Is Philosophy Still The Friend Of Wisdom?
Maybe we'd be wiser if we dispensed with the idea...if we worked our way up to it instead of thinking we already know what it is.
Re: Is Philosophy Still The Friend Of Wisdom?
This pretty much sums up the issue.
Philosophy is diluted by the unwise who call themselves philosophers. And excommunication from the fraternity for the decidedly unwise doesn't seem to be a thing...
Re: Is Philosophy Still The Friend Of Wisdom?
I'm working at it! Should I inform you of any breakthroughs?
Re: Is Philosophy Still The Friend Of Wisdom?
I thought you wanted to gradually work up to it, not with a thought that we already know what it is. A breakthrough may mean just that. Although a breaktrhough may also, alternatively, mean a giant step for a man, and a giant leap for mankind, but not actually to arrive at the goal of enquiry.
I suggest we take baby-steps. But don't let me stop you from making leaps-and-bounds. Suit yourself.
Re: Is Philosophy Still The Friend Of Wisdom?
That's what is meant by "I'm working at it!"! Breakthroughs are not guaranteed to follow...but in case there is one, I merely asked should I inform you of it? One thing I discovered about wisdom. It begins in simplicity.
Re: Is Philosophy Still The Friend Of Wisdom?
And wisdom that begins in simplicity, continues to become complexity.
Your turn.
Sorry, I did not answer your direct question: should you inform me or else not inform me of a breakthrough? My answer is: I leave that decision up to you. Do as you please. Don't let me influence your will with my caprice.
Re: Is Philosophy Still The Friend Of Wisdom?
...as I said, "begins in simplicity". What does the word 'begin' mean to you.-1- wrote: ↑Tue Apr 09, 2019 9:45 pmAnd wisdom that begins in simplicity, continues to become complexity.
Your turn.
Sorry, I did not answer your direct question: should you inform me or else not inform me of a breakthrough? My answer is: I leave that decision up to you. Do as you please. Don't let me influence your will with my caprice.
Re: Is Philosophy Still The Friend Of Wisdom?
I would say the same as it means to you. If it's different in meaning to the two of us, we're in trouble.Dubious wrote: ↑Tue Apr 09, 2019 9:59 pm...as I said, "begins in simplicity". What does the word 'begin' mean to you.-1- wrote: ↑Tue Apr 09, 2019 9:45 pmAnd wisdom that begins in simplicity, continues to become complexity.
Your turn.
Sorry, I did not answer your direct question: should you inform me or else not inform me of a breakthrough? My answer is: I leave that decision up to you. Do as you please. Don't let me influence your will with my caprice.
My view is not to start with definitions; if anything, then end with definitions. Logical positivism was a failure, proven by Wittgenstein. I am not going to challenge him by going against his advice.
I suggest (but not force upon you) that we don't dissect the meanings of ordinary words with well-distributed meanings. I know it's a bit of a downer to be negative sounding right from the start. I'll try to make up to you for this later if I can.
Re: Is Philosophy Still The Friend Of Wisdom?
Nothing to do with Logical positivism or Wittgenstein or any philosophy but simply with an organic understanding of reality as if one were grubbing for worms in the topsoil. That's my view and yours is yours. Nothing more to discuss.-1- wrote: ↑Tue Apr 09, 2019 10:34 pmI would say the same as it means to you. If it's different in meaning to the two of us, we're in trouble.Dubious wrote: ↑Tue Apr 09, 2019 9:59 pm...as I said, "begins in simplicity". What does the word 'begin' mean to you.-1- wrote: ↑Tue Apr 09, 2019 9:45 pm
And wisdom that begins in simplicity, continues to become complexity.
Your turn.
Sorry, I did not answer your direct question: should you inform me or else not inform me of a breakthrough? My answer is: I leave that decision up to you. Do as you please. Don't let me influence your will with my caprice.
My view is not to start with definitions; if anything, then end with definitions. Logical positivism was a failure, proven by Wittgenstein. I am not going to challenge him by going against his advice.
I suggest (but not force upon you) that we don't dissect the meanings of ordinary words with well-distributed meanings. I know it's a bit of a downer to be negative sounding right from the start. I'll try to make up to you for this later if I can.