What Is Philosophy?

[yiostheoy]

This particular monthly article has some interesting quotes defining philosophy in it.

My favorite is the quote of A.C. Grayling on the BBC.

https://philosophynow.org/issues/79/Wha ... o_We_Do_It

[Harbal]

This particular monthly article has some interesting quotes defining philosophy in it.

My favorite is the quote of A.C. Grayling on the BBC.

I am always reluctant to speak on other people's behalf but, just on this occasion, I'm going to stick my neck out and say that nobody here gives a fuck what your favourite anything is.

[Nick_A]

Philosophy is the love of wisdom. It has devolved in modern times into the love of self justification through argument. We know it takes two to enjoy the love of argument but can two people share a love of wisdom in pursuit of wisdom as opposed to arguing partial truths? Probably so but most have been driven underground by "experts" so you're stuck with arguing. But as long as good scotch is available there is at least something to be gained through these arguments.

[A_Seagull]

Philosophy is the love of wisdom. It has devolved in modern times into the love of self justification through argument. We know it takes two to enjoy the love of argument but can two people share a love of wisdom in pursuit of wisdom as opposed to arguing partial truths? Probably so but most have been driven underground by "experts" so you're stuck with arguing. But as long as good scotch is available there is at least something to be gained through these arguments.

And where is the wisdom in philosophy?

It seems to me to be like searching for pearls in a morass of mud.

[Dalek Prime]

Philosophy is the love of wisdom. It has devolved in modern times into the love of self justification through argument. We know it takes two to enjoy the love of argument but can two people share a love of wisdom in pursuit of wisdom as opposed to arguing partial truths? Probably so but most have been driven underground by "experts" so you're stuck with arguing. But as long as good scotch is available there is at least something to be gained through these arguments.

Yes, that's the meaning of the term Philosophy. But the practice of philosophy is about reasoning. If philosophy was just about passion and love, only the most passionate and emotional would make the cut as philosophers, with reasoners coming a distant second. Which is certainly not the case. Emotion introduces falsehoods, and bad thinking.

[ken]

Philosophy is the love of wisdom. It has devolved in modern times into the love of self justification through argument. We know it takes two to enjoy the love of argument but can two people share a love of wisdom in pursuit of wisdom as opposed to arguing partial truths? Probably so but most have been driven underground by "experts" so you're stuck with arguing. But as long as good scotch is available there is at least something to be gained through these arguments.

Yes, that's the meaning of the term Philosophy. But the practice of philosophy is about reasoning. If philosophy was just about passion and love, only the most passionate and emotional would make the cut as philosophers, with reasoners coming a distant second. Which is certainly not the case. Emotion introduces falsehoods, and bad thinking.

Like nick pointed out 'philosophy' once meant love of wisdom. How is wisdom gained? Through learning. Who has the most or strongest love of learning? We all did in our first very few years. Therefore, the best philosophers in Life are very young children.

Sadly though, as pointed out, we grow up and then think we are the "experts". 'Arguing', itself can then become and does become a disputed point, itself, which is then fought over. If two people, however, are still searching for wisdom in order to become wiser, and want to discuss in a truly logical reasoned manner with both providing sound, valid arguments, then I can guarantee they both will become much wiser. They are, as delek prime pointed out, practicing philosophy. But most often is the case with older people they want to 'argue' in the debating, fighting for, disputing against, disagreement making definition than they do want to 'argue' in the logically reasoning definition.

But what I have discovered is I learnt far more about Life and how to live Life by looking at and listening truly to the greatest philosophers of all, i.e., young children. The younger a person is the more they taught Me about what is right and what is wrong in Life. Something I have never been able to obtain from an adult person.

'Philosophy' like everything else is relative to the observer. I think philosophy can NOT be taught. A 'love-of-learning' is something that we ALL are born with, but this love is also something that we can and do most sadly loose. I found it is the case that this love is lost through a relatively newly developed "education" system. A system which teaches people to learn, and must know, what is already known, instead of teaching and supporting our natural love-of-learning new things that are not yet, consciously, known.

Generally and unfortunately most children are taught that there are some things that we can never know of, therefore, reinforcing a distorted belief system that stops learning instead of supporting 'phil-o-sophy', the love-of-wisdom, itself.

[HexHammer]

This particular monthly article has some interesting quotes defining philosophy in it.

My favorite is the quote of A.C. Grayling on the BBC.

https://philosophynow.org/issues/79/Wha ... o_We_Do_It

Philosophy = love of wisdom = stop asking stupid questions and do stupid things!

[Hobbes' Choice]

This particular monthly article has some interesting quotes defining philosophy in it.

My favorite is the quote of A.C. Grayling on the BBC.

https://philosophynow.org/issues/79/Wha ... o_We_Do_It

Philosophy = love of wisdom = stop asking stupid questions and do stupid things!

One of the aims is to produce unambiguous language. There are two ways to parse the last part of your post.
1) Stop asking stupid questions and stop doing stupid things.
2) Stop asking stupid questions and do stupid things instead.

"Stop asking stupid questions and doing stupid things." Would have been less ambiguous.

Now on the the content.
I might also suggest; stop making stupid comments.

Part of philosophy is exactly to ask stupid questions, in order to demonstrate their stupidity and to identify when actions are stupid. It is not a set of recommendations, by an analysis of the consequences,based on a given set of circumstances and beliefs.
It most usually concludes towards rational actor assumptions; or if irrational or emotional responses are identified can show how and where they are irrational or sometimes illogical.

[Walker]

This particular monthly article has some interesting quotes defining philosophy in it.

My favorite is the quote of A.C. Grayling on the BBC.

https://philosophynow.org/issues/79/Wha ... o_We_Do_It

Philosophy = love of wisdom = stop asking stupid questions and do stupid things!

One of the aims is to produce unambiguous language. There are two ways to parse the last part of your post.
1) Stop asking stupid questions and stop doing stupid things.
2) Stop asking stupid questions and do stupid things instead.

"Stop asking stupid questions and doing stupid things." Would have been less ambiguous.

Now on the the content.
I might also suggest; stop making stupid comments.

Part of philosophy is exactly to ask stupid questions, in order to demonstrate their stupidity and to identify when actions are stupid. It is not a set of recommendations, by an analysis of the consequences,based on a given set of circumstances and beliefs.
It most usually concludes towards rational actor assumptions; or if irrational or emotional responses are identified can show how and where they are irrational or sometimes illogical.

Hobbes this is terrible. You can think more clearly than this. Simply apply yourself. Believe me, everyone will benefit.

Hex is right on the money. Patronizing stupid questions is a form of subsidy.

As thinking folks know from observation of the way it is, when you subsidize something you get more of it.

Playing the Stupid Question Game (SQG) subsidizes stupidity.

Adults who are not capable of formulating an intelligent question that reflects a modicum of comprehension are not worthy of Philosophy.

Stupid questions are the Hydra Methodology from the Feed Me School of Philosophy.
Answer one stupid question, two or more stupid questions immediately appear to take their place.

The Feed Me School of Philosophy has organically grown from:
- Intellectual Safe Zones for Adults
- Fast Food Joints
- The Think For Me School of Philosophy.

People with a dollar can get a dollar meal at the convenient drive-thru.

As fast-food customers, folks got notions that questions confer upon them customer status.
For the price of a stupid question you can step right up and order.

As every consumer has been conditioned to know, the customer is always right. If the flavor ain’t right, send it back. Ask another stupid question until the server gets it right. And if the server doesn't try, woe indignation.

Welcome to the brave new world of philosophy consumers.

The Best of The Soup Nazi
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M2lfZg-apSA

[Hobbes' Choice]

Philosophy = love of wisdom = stop asking stupid questions and do stupid things!

One of the aims is to produce unambiguous language. There are two ways to parse the last part of your post.
1) Stop asking stupid questions and stop doing stupid things.
2) Stop asking stupid questions and do stupid things instead.

"Stop asking stupid questions and doing stupid things." Would have been less ambiguous.

Now on the the content.
I might also suggest; stop making stupid comments.

Part of philosophy is exactly to ask stupid questions, in order to demonstrate their stupidity and to identify when actions are stupid. It is not a set of recommendations, by an analysis of the consequences,based on a given set of circumstances and beliefs.
It most usually concludes towards rational actor assumptions; or if irrational or emotional responses are identified can show how and where they are irrational or sometimes illogical.

Hobbes this is terrible. You can think more clearly than this. Simply apply yourself. Believe me, everyone will benefit.

Hex is right on the money. Patronizing stupid questions is a form of subsidy.

Subsidy? Are you bonkers?

[HexHammer]

Part of philosophy is exactly to ask stupid questions, in order to demonstrate their stupidity and to identify when actions are stupid. It is not a set of recommendations, by an analysis of the consequences,based on a given set of circumstances and beliefs.
It most usually concludes towards rational actor assumptions; or if irrational or emotional responses are identified can show how and where they are irrational or sometimes illogical.

Says who? ..u'r mom?
If you ask the same stupid questions in a serious business, you'll just get fired, and it's a good sign of why no one wants philosophers others than universities to parrot the babble to students.

You never reach the point of relevance because you are clueless, clueless people are useless..

[Arising_uk]

...

You never reach the point of relevance because you are clueless, clueless people are useless..

Now, now, don't be so hard on yourself.

[HexHammer]

...

You never reach the point of relevance because you are clueless, clueless people are useless..

Now, now, don't be so hard on yourself.

Haha, very funny, but I've proven my worth, but none of you have.

[Arising_uk]

Now how on earth would you know that?

What do you mean by "worth" for that matter?

[HexHammer]

Now how on earth would you know that?

What do you mean by "worth" for that matter?

When I can walze into a big newspaper and outdo what highly educated people can't, when I have no education, reducing work tasks with 90% time, like 7 hours for internal newsletter, 3 hours for manual install, etc.

I do my own law cases, I don't need a lawyer. Even won a case against Denmarks biggest tele/internet provider.

I am good at what I do.