• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

What is Philosophy?

reason

New member
Joined
Apr 26, 2007
Messages
1,209
MBTI Type
ESFJ
I agree with wyrdsister, that not all religious traditions are authoritarian, particularly Buddhism, for which I have great respect, precsiely for its nonauthoritarianism. This is in contrast to the Judeo-Christian or Islamic traditions, which tend to be, though not need be, highly authoritarian.

SolitaryWalker, the problem with rationality (what you call reason), is that for many so-called rationalists, the authority of The Bible or Qu'ran has simply been exchanged for the authority of science or logic. Thus, many who hold traditionally Eastern religious beliefs, are right to to regard such "rationalists" as hypocritical and unenlightened, slaves to authority and spiritually shallow.
 

SolitaryWalker

Tenured roisterer
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
3,504
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
I agree with wyrdsister, that not all religious traditions are authoritarian, particularly Buddhism, for which I have great respect, precsiely for its nonauthoritarianism. This is in contrast to the Judeo-Christian or Islamic traditions, which tend to be, though not need be, highly authoritarian.

SolitaryWalker, the problem with rationality (what you call reason), is that for many so-called rationalists, the authority of The Bible or Qu'ran has simply been exchanged for the authority of science or logic. Thus, many who hold traditionally Eastern religious beliefs, are right to to regard such "rationalists" as hypocritical and unenlightened, slaves to authority and spiritually shallow.


Not sure if I followed you there.


Religions talk about eschatology, questions of what happens after our death. Metaphysics cant reach that far, so we cant rationalize about that. Hence eschatological ideas could be accepted only on authority.
 

logan235711

New member
Joined
Apr 29, 2007
Messages
166
MBTI Type
INTJ
Philosophy has no absolute definition, even with philosophers, even they argue what it means. But in the 20th century many thought of it as the attempt to clarify thought and language--thought being the lesser of the two. But seeing as the twentieth century is over and logical positivism is fading, if not faded--this is once again in the air.
 

Splittet

Wannabe genius
Joined
Jun 12, 2007
Messages
632
MBTI Type
INTJ
I kind of like the definition that philosophy is the pursuit of problems unsolvable to humans.
 

The Ü™

Permabanned
Joined
May 26, 2007
Messages
11,910
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Philosophy is simply rational understanding. (Some schools actually call biology "Natural Philosophy.")
 

The Ü™

Permabanned
Joined
May 26, 2007
Messages
11,910
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Okay, let me rephrase:

Philosophy is the theoretical branch of Logic.

Mathematics is the bridge -- the theory-to-application branch of Logic.

Science is the applied branch of Logic.
 

TaylorS

Aspie Idealist
Joined
Aug 6, 2007
Messages
365
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
972
Instinctual Variant
so/sp
Philosophy is about using logic and reason to explain what can and cannot be said to exist, what is the nature of what exists, what counts as true knowledge of what exists, what is meaningful, and what is moral.
 

RaptorWizard

Permabanned
Joined
Mar 19, 2012
Messages
5,895
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
Philosophy is the study of the mind, ethics, logic, reason, meaning, existence, wisdom, knowledge, Cosmology, science, religion, metaphysics, and most importantly of all the nature of God.
 

RaptorWizard

Permabanned
Joined
Mar 19, 2012
Messages
5,895
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
RaptorWizard's responce to SolitaryWalker's What is Philosophy? thread:

A question of great importance would be to clarify and define a universal definition for philosophy. I believe philosophy at its heart to be a quest for wisdom, though what one man sees as wise may be deemed foolish by another man. Though I do agree with SolitaryWalker that we must be careful about our perception of wisdom, and that in this quest we seek to advance our understanding, he holds understanding is the sole purpose, and that using philosophy to some other end is incorrect. Philosophy should also be a means of achievement, that is, it should make us grow in greatness. He is right however when he further asserts how philosophy transcends the empirical nature of science, and that a metaphysical assumption must first be made before it can be empirically validated via experiment. Again though, SolitaryWalker incorrectly asserts that philosophy is purely about truth, rather than also accomplishing our inner desires, as he says how our prejudices (ironically from his own prejudice) pollute the truth. Some things however transcend truth, and that the ultimate meaning will be found within, with what is important to us and our beliefs, as reality is indeed shaped by our focus. He is gravely mistaken in asserting how philosophy does not keep in perspective any of our personal ends (the funny thing is though that he says personal growth follows from our inquiries, so in essence, he contradicts himself, since all along then it did indeed have a personal element). I do agree on his next point about forcefully dispelling ignorance being secondary to advancing ideas and offering the opportunity to learn. Again though, he aims to get solely at the truth, in rejection of all passions and inner desires. If anything, he needs to learn the critical distinction between passion and attachment, passion impelling us forward, and attachment restricting us, since passion is a vision of what we wish to be, but attachment is a lingering fog clouding our vision. Passion if used properly can be controlled, whereas attachment binds us by its strings and limits our personal freedom. His argument for philosophy and its power of explanation is indeed superior, as he correctly asserts, to the religious book of dogma. He then says how religion deals with questions incapable for rationalization, such as what happens when we die, which he claims cannot be reached by metaphysics. Again I am in disagreement, as if anything, nothing possesses greater power than the illumination reason can cast upon our world. All in all, SolitaryWalker has brought up some very interesting points, but we cannot accept any such assertions without a challenge.

:wizfreak:
 
Top