Page 1 of 2
What Is The Present Nature, And The Future, Of Philosophy?
Posted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 1:24 pm
by Philosophy Now
The following answers to this question of philosophy each win a random book.
http://philosophynow.org/issues/98/What ... Philosophy
Re: What Is The Present Nature, And The Future, Of Philosoph
Posted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 2:02 pm
by spike
It is clear to me that philosophy is here to stay. Its main purpose is to argue and discuss the merits of things and how we should proceed in life. But philosophy is not what it used to be. Today it is chiefly in the business of human governance. Today it is more about sustaining and maintaining our world. In the past it was more about creating the mutually beneficial, utilitarian morals and values in which we ought to live by and govern ourselves. For the most part we have achieved those goals.
Philosophy did its heaviest lifting in the past when it was creating the framework, structures and institutions we live by and in today. Now it is more about sustaining and maintaining life and the systems we've created to do that.
Re: What Is The Present Nature, And The Future, Of Philosoph
Posted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 2:15 pm
by marjoramblues
Excellent all!
Particularly enjoyed this: [emphasis added]
We need to bring clarity of thinking to things that really matter. Philosophers generally need the confidence, shown by some, to be engaged in the issues of the day – to be prepared to campaign, to challenge, to cut a path through the swamp of media commentary. In short, to be gadflies.When giving their time and energy to public debate, philosophers must speak in straightforward and accessible language, for that in itself will be a challenge to the obfuscations of those in authority. We must support the philosophy in schools movement, giving young people the tools to think for themselves, for that too will encourage resistance to the ever-increasing demands for conformity.
One cannot predict the future. The best one can do is to outline one’s hopes; in so doing, there is an implicit recognition of what is missing from the present, as well as a statement of the desire for something different. In a changed world, philosophers could be guardians of education, defenders of freedom, advocates for humanity, campaigners for justice and common decency. That would be a future to hope for.
David Howard, Church Stretton, Shropshire
The question is: What is presently stopping philosophers being more visible in everyday media; providing an open challenge to politicians?
I can't believe they are shy of being identified as a 'philosopher', are they? Would the mere mention of the word turn people off...? As in 'what the hell do they know?'
A recent Ch4 interview featured a historian - who brilliantly poured scorn on certain political behaviour.
Identifying the problems of perception and presentation of philosophy/ers, a good start.
Re: What Is The Present Nature, And The Future, Of Philosoph
Posted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 2:28 pm
by duszek
Speaking in a clear language is good.
I would go further and expect from a philosopher (in Germany a course in logic is obligatory for all philosophy students) that they explaind the tricks of language and how to avoid them and how to deal with them.
This would be useful in everyday life: how to stand up to tricksters, conmen and other skillful cheaters.
Re: What Is The Present Nature, And The Future, Of Philosoph
Posted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 2:38 pm
by spike
I don't think philosophers should criticize politicians as philosophers. A philosopher's profession should stay in the background. He will never be taken seriously if he projects himself as a philosopher. He will appear to be coming from some logical place and in general politics is not a logical place.
Re: What Is The Present Nature, And The Future, Of Philosoph
Posted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 2:59 pm
by duszek
Politics is a logical place.
But the real logic has often to be disguised by some other logic or cover logic.
Because it is assumed that the real logic will not sell.
An excuse often disguises an unpopular logic.
Re: What Is The Present Nature, And The Future, Of Philosoph
Posted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 3:11 pm
by marjoramblues
duszek wrote:Speaking in a clear language is good.
I would go further and expect from a philosopher... that they explaind the tricks of language and how to avoid them and how to deal with them.
This would be useful in everyday life: how to stand up to tricksters, conmen and other skillful cheaters.
Totally agree.
I think it very important that the language of politicians should be carefully scrutinized and challenged. At every opportunity. The minute that they come out with phrases such as 'Scroungers and Skivers'...' You are either with us (and a patriot) ...or against us (a traitor).
The list goes on...
If philosophers - as philosophers - can't publicly challenge this kind of thing via popular programmes, then change the name....to political analyst...whatever...
Re: What Is The Present Nature, And The Future, Of Philosoph
Posted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 3:40 pm
by marjoramblues
spike wrote:I don't think philosophers should criticize politicians as philosophers. A philosopher's profession should stay in the background. He will never be taken seriously if he projects himself as a philosopher. He will appear to be coming from some logical place and in general politics is not a logical place.
What should they criticise them as, then? Joining the discussion today is X, fashion designer and part-time philosopher. For those, who don't know what a philosopher looks like, this is She.
Why should the profession of philosophy stay in the background? Politicians are forever on our screens; they will have a degree which includes Philosophy, Politics and Economics. Professional politicians...erm...salaried politicians should be challenged by salaried philosophers...hmm... scratch that...
The perception of a philosopher,,,,pretty poor, really...
... coming from some logical place?
And what is wrong with that? If combined with 'common sense'...and capacity to suggest implications,,,
If, in general, politics is not a logical place, then what is it?
If political policies, affecting all the population, are not based on evidence and correct reasoning, then isn't it time they should be ? And politicians held more accountable for expensive mistakes when driven by fancy...'Education should be...'
We should have learned quite a considerable amount from history; why is it that politicians get away with saying 'we will learn from this' after repeating previous mistakes, or failing to listen.
Competent philosophers should be engaging right from the get-go. Appearing on telly, tearing down claims and arguments based on thin air. Discussing implications and consequences.
Re: What Is The Present Nature, And The Future, Of Philosoph
Posted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 6:51 pm
by spike
majoramblues,
You make it sound as though politics should be clean and precious, that a politician should do as he said he would during campaigning. That is being naive. He most likely would not last long.
When you think about it politicians are dealing with a crazy world that is constantly in flux and with constituents that are as fickle or uninterested as the day is long. Generally philosophers would not put up with that stuff. A politician is generally successful because she/he manages to deal with a number of competing variables. A philosopher is not so good at doing that because of the frustrations governing entails. A politician is more willing to get his hands dirt than a philosopher.
There are very few philosophers who have been good at politics, been able to mix and balance the two. In Canada we once had one, Pierre Trudeau who managed to stay in power for quite a long time. Today, I think of Obama as a successful mix of the two. But they are rare and far between.
Philosophers can contribute to the political discourse, as they should, like economists do. But when it comes to governing neither of them are that good at the job because their ideas are generally to fixed to satisfy the majority.
Re: What Is The Present Nature, And The Future, Of Philosoph
Posted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 7:39 pm
by marjoramblues
spike wrote:majoramblues,
You make it sound as though politics should be clean and precious, that a politician should do as he said he would during campaigning. That is being naive. He most likely would not last long.
M: Perhaps you should re-read my post.
Political promises are seen to be very rarely kept. Mistrust prevails. What the public deserves is someone with integrity and accountability whose policies are held continually under scrutiny.
When you think about it politicians are dealing with a crazy world that is constantly in flux and with constituents that are as fickle or uninterested as the day is long. Generally philosophers would not put up with that stuff. A politician is generally successful because she/he manages to deal with a number of competing variables. A philosopher is not so good at doing that because of the frustrations governing entails. A politician is more willing to get his hands dirt than a philosopher.
M: My thoughts - in this thread - relate to the role of philosophers in challenging political arguments. And the image portrayed, or not...of philosophy as a visible, useful tool, either to explain/counter the arguments or provide their own.
Perhaps it's time that philosophical politicians or political philosophers, who want to make a difference, show us the benefits of their education...in practical terms and in full sight.
There are very few philosophers who have been good at politics, been able to mix and balance the two. In Canada we once had one, Pierre Trudeau who managed to stay in power for quite a long time. Today, I think of Obama as a successful mix of the two. But they are rare and far between.
M: Yes, I understand that. However, they need to do what they are good at. Analysis and synthesis. And be more media-savvy and visible while they are at it.
Philosophers can contribute to the political discourse, as they should, like economists do. But when it comes to governing neither of them are that good at the job because their ideas are generally to fixed to satisfy the majority.
M: Really? All those generally narrow-minded non-generals...
Why should it be left to politicians to manage a country - according to their bias or other masters - when most can't even manage a household, or even have experience as 'managers' ?
Re: What Is The Present Nature, And The Future, Of Philosoph
Posted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 7:50 pm
by marjoramblues
This too is a high and fine hope: [emphasis added]
Philosophy is also terrific at establishing and synthesizing values, which is also about whether something is whole and sound, integrated and viable. I hope that in the future philosophy applies its charge of being the love of wisdom to how people negotiate our union with nature. It could be a bright future, but it likely won’t be a bright one without philosophy leading the cavalcade of change and adaptation.Andrew Porter, Lexington, MA
Again, the question: How? Given our current power systems and structures...
Re: What Is The Present Nature, And The Future, Of Philosoph
Posted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 9:47 pm
by spike
Why should it be left to politicians to manage a country - according to their bias or other masters - when most can't even manage a household, or even have experience as 'managers' ?
The managers of the country are really the civil servants, unelected officials, some continuing serves from administration to administration.
Re: What Is The Present Nature, And The Future, Of Philosoph
Posted: Wed Sep 25, 2013 10:51 pm
by marjoramblues
spike wrote:Why should it be left to politicians to manage a country - according to their bias or other masters - when most can't even manage a household, or even have experience as 'managers' ?
The managers of the country are really the civil servants, unelected officials, some continuing serves from administration to administration.
Ah yes, the civil service - administrative structure.
Useful sorts, whot?
Not world changers like philosophers, then?
Wisdom Lovers and Whole World Leaders Bringing a Bright Future...
Where were we again...?
... to challenge, to cut a path through the swamp of media commentary....
...guardians of education, defenders of freedom, advocates for humanity, campaigners for justice and common decency.
Re: What Is The Present Nature, And The Future, Of Philosoph
Posted: Sat Oct 05, 2013 2:30 pm
by spike
An article asked, "Can we see Philosophy?"
Perhaps that is the future of philosophy, done not so much through language but through gestures and deeds, through visuals and transactions.
I am thinking that is why philosophy departments in schools and collages are closing and not as prominent as they once were, because philosophy is not as language orientated as it used to be. Today we communicate our philosophy differently, more materialistically.
Re: What Is The Present Nature, And The Future, Of Philosoph
Posted: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:31 pm
by thedoc
"What can we eat? Why do we eat? Where can we have lunch?" - Douglas Adams.
I would guess philosophy is in the last stage.
The Restaurant at the end of the Universe.