Why does anyone need philosophy?

[jay gw]

Does every individual need a personal philosophy?

Why or why not? Is it possible to live without one?

I've been thinking about my personal philosophy, and it's hard to identify. For most people, they don't follow an established or formal philosophy, it's more of an ad hoc type (improvised and impromptu), pasted together from experiences and education, personal traits.

But why does anyone need to follow a philosophy? If you don't have one, does that mean you just react to the moment, and let the particulars of the moment guide you? Is there anything wrong with that?

If you don't investigate reality, knowledge and values yourself, and instead rely on "established" wisdom from dead thinkers, aren't you guilty of irresponsibility? You're committing the same sins that Jref posters accuse the religious of doing: letting others do your thinking.

Why is dependence on Aristotle or Nietzsche better than dependence on Jesus or Buddha? Is reliance on secular philosophy better than on the religious? Why?

_____
Philosophy:
A system of values by which one lives.
Love and pursuit of wisdom by intellectual means and moral self-discipline.
Investigation of the nature, causes, or principles of reality, knowledge, or values, based on logical reasoning rather than empirical methods.

It's both a noun/thing and an activity/verb.

 

[Z]

Does every individual need a personal philosophy?

Why or why not? Is it possible to live without one?

I've been thinking about my personal philosophy, and it's hard to identify. For most people, they don't follow an established or formal philosophy, it's more of an ad hoc type (improvised and impromptu), pasted together from experiences and education, personal traits.

But why does anyone need to follow a philosophy? If you don't have one, does that mean you just react to the moment, and let the particulars of the moment guide you? Is there anything wrong with that?

If you don't investigate reality, knowledge and values yourself, and instead rely on "established" wisdom from dead thinkers, aren't you guilty of irresponsibility? You're committing the same sins that Jref posters accuse the religious of doing: letting others do your thinking.

Why is dependence on Aristotle or Nietzsche better than dependence on Jesus or Buddha? Is reliance on secular philosophy better than on the religious? Why?

_____
Philosophy:
A system of values by which one lives.
Love and pursuit of wisdom by intellectual means and moral self-discipline.
Investigation of the nature, causes, or principles of reality, knowledge, or values, based on logical reasoning rather than empirical methods.

It's both a noun/thing and an activity/verb.

Short answer: They don't. A heck of a lot of people seem to live just fine, moment to moment, with neither philosophy nor religion to guide them. They take care of themselves.

I leave the long answers to those who think they understand the purposes of philosophy.

Note: This does not, in my mind, relate to issues such as philosophy of science, whereby the scientific method arises, or philosophy of mathematics, or language, etc. I admit, some modes of philosophical consideration are required; however, 'dependence' on dead philosophers is simply not necessary, I think, to live a good life. Leave such notions to lawmakers and scientists, but the common folk simply need to get along in this world.

 

[RandFan]

Does every individual need a personal philosophy?

I have a brother-in-law who ascribes to no ideology, theology or formal philosophy. He does not read the news paper, watch news on tv, listen to talking heads or news radio. He is successful and spends most of his time with his grand kids, working in his garden and watching sports on TV. I think you could say in general terms he has a philosophy.

Why or why not? Is it possible to live without one?

A "formal" philosophy? Sure. But one must hold some truths and ideas so there must be some informal philosophy whether one chooses to believe that or not. Unless of course you base every decision on the flip of a coin.

I've been thinking about my personal philosophy, and it's hard to identify. For most people, they don't follow an established or formal philosophy, it's more of an ad hoc type (improvised and impromptu), pasted together from experiences and education, personal traits.

Sounds like the best kind to me. I know its corny but I like Bruce Lee's take that one must find his or her own way in life and not rely on any one philosophy. He held that this was applicable to life as well as martial arts. I don't know why the example is important. I guess he was capable of kicking most people's butts so he must be correct.

But why does anyone need to follow a philosophy? If you don't have one, does that mean you just react to the moment, and let the particulars of the moment guide you? Is there anything wrong with that?

It depends on what a person wants out of life. My brother in law gets what he wants. Reading the news used to cause him a lot of aggravation. He was sensitive to a lot of stories. Political and religious arguments used to bother him for a long time and he lost a couple of friends for awhile because of it. He decide that he would opt out for his own health. I don't blame him. I wouldn't do the same and I don't think most of us should unless we are simply too troubled by the world around us.

If you don't investigate reality, knowledge and values yourself, and instead rely on "established" wisdom from dead thinkers, aren't you guilty of irresponsibility? You're committing the same sins that Jref posters accuse the religious of doing: letting others do your thinking.

Why is dependence on Aristotle or Nietzsche better than dependence on Jesus or Buddha? Is reliance on secular philosophy better than on the religious? Why?

Blind adherence to any philosophy is irresponsible.

 

[arthwollipot]

Which Philosophy Do You Follow?

Just a little bit of fun. I, apparently, am a hybrid Existentialist/Strong Egoist.

Silly quizzes like this show just how much one's personal take on life does not fit into predefined categories.

 

[lifegazer]

Silly quizzes like this show just how much one's personal take on life does not fit into predefined categories.

Who defines what life is all about?
Why is that particular definition worthy of being fit into?

You might think that philosophy is a game/fun, but at the end of the day (end of your life) and at the end of humanity, the question will beg why either you or humanity has ended as it did.
Therein resides the profundity of philosophy. Therein resides the simplicity of arthwollipot.
Philosophy is the most important subject for humans to ponder. Those that make light of it don't have much light within themselves.

 

[arthwollipot]

Even though you quoted it, you missed entirely the meaning of my last sentence. Let me repeat it for you:

Silly quizzes like this show just how much one's personal take on life does not fit into predefined categories.

Is that a little clearer?

 

[Z]

Philosophy doesn't put food on the table, prevent war, prevent disease, or make people very happy.

BTW - I came up 'hedonist'. That's about right.

Philosophy, in the real world, is a lot of hot air.

 

[Bodhi Dharma Zen]

Something is "philosophy", in the broadest sense. In this case everyone have its very own "philosophy", their very own belief system. Everyone of us. Why do we need one? its like asking why do we need to believe? Because thats who we are, and I guess it is unavoidable, we need a "platform" to operate in the world, a bunch of little beliefs and assumptions.

I we are strict and use the word to designate real philosophy then you have to go to the school to learn it. Currently, there are two big branches, Continental and Analytical. I prefer the last one, which deals exclusively with language and the way we use it.

Oh, in the survey I score as an existentialist, with hedonism and nihilism as really close second and third, "divine command" at the last place.

 

[lifegazer]

Even though you quoted it, you missed entirely the meaning of my last sentence. Let me repeat it for you:

Silly quizzes like this show just how much one's personal take on life does not fit into predefined categories.

Is that a little clearer?

No.
What's clear to me is that you don't take philosophy seriously = what's clear to me is that 'your' life is a sham, since you're only interested in feeding your pleasures/desires and don't care about the consequences of that feeding or whether life is more important than what it blindly thirsts for.
Come "the end", the question of whether philosophy could have benefitted 'you' or not will be wasted upon you - since you have now gone and your actions cannot be changed. But now, whilst you live, the potential for philosophy to enrich your life is being wasted by your ignorant attitude.
You can either be negative and offended by my words - or positive and vow to take philosophy seriously so as to enrich your life.
I just wanted you to know that only a fool would mock the power of philosophy.

 

[jay gw]

Philosophy is the most important subject for humans to ponder. Those that make light of it don't have much light within themselves.

I agree to an extent, but wonder why nobody in school wants to major in philosophy. I guess it's because there are so few jobs in it. Mostly teaching.

 

[arthwollipot]

No.
What's clear to me is that you don't take philosophy seriously = what's clear to me is that 'your' life is a sham, since you're only interested in feeding your pleasures/desires and don't care about the consequences of that feeding or whether life is more important than what it blindly thirsts for.
Come "the end", the question of whether philosophy could have benefitted 'you' or not will be wasted upon you - since you have now gone and your actions cannot be changed. But now, whilst you live, the potential for philosophy to enrich your life is being wasted by your ignorant attitude.
You can either be negative and offended by my words - or positive and vow to take philosophy seriously so as to enrich your life.
I just wanted you to know that only a fool would mock the power of philosophy.

WHOOSH!!! That was the sound of Lifegazer completely and totally missing the point. Let me spell it out in words of two syllables or less:

IT ... IS ... SILLY ... TO ... BASE ... YOUR ... PHILOSOPHY (oops, more than two syllables there) ... ON ... PRE-DEFINED ... CATEGORIES.

Everyone needs to come to an understanding of the world in their own terms. You have your philosophy, I have mine. Jay GW has another. Trying to shoehorn your philosophy into one of twelve predefined categories is as silly and insulting as trying to shoehorn your personality into one of twelve astrological signs.

I posted the quiz as a demonstration that people NEED to take their philosophy more seriously than that. How you possibly got the impression that my life is a sham, that I am simple, that I don't take philosophy seriously, and all the other LIES you posted about me is quite frankly beyond me. You don't even know me and you are spreading lies about me. Technically, that is slander.

Retract your statements, lifegazer. Apologise. Or I will come back and haunt you.

 

[lifegazer]

Retract your statements, lifegazer. Apologise. Or I will come back and haunt you.

LOL.
I've spoken to you before. I know exactly what you think about the power of philosophy to change what you want to believe. Like I said, your desire and hunger are the most important things in your life... and you don't give a crap about wanting to change yourself. In fact, you mock anything that challenges the staus quo of your habitual experiences.

You have no power to haunt anyone. A mind must give power to something before that thing can haunt them. If you haunt me, it's because I allow you to do so - not because of any power that you possess.

Take philosophy seriously or die a shambolic existence.

 

[Eleatic Stranger]

I prefer the last [analytic] one, which deals exclusively with language and the way we use it.

Er, not so much. Analytic philosophy, as a tradition, started with a serious focus on language and has maintained a significant focus on questions regarding the philosophy of language, but it has diverged a little from the sort of "the only thing we talk about it how we talk about what we talk about" line. And by 'a little' I mean 'pretty much entirely'. It's far superior to the (often times)conceptual muddle of continental philosophy, but it's also moved on just a little since, oh, Carnap.

 

[arthwollipot]

I am really having trouble believing this. After reading a few posts of mine, you feel you know me so well that you conclude that my life is a sham and that I don't take philosophy seriously? Are you absolutely sure you want to come to that conclusion?

Do you judge all people you encounter on so little evidence?

I know exactly what you think about the power of philosophy to change what you want to believe. Like I said, your desire and hunger are the most important things in your life... and you don't give a crap about wanting to change yourself. In fact, you mock anything that challenges the staus quo of your habitual experiences.

You should apply for the $1m, lifegazer. You can obviously read not only my mind, but also my whole life, since I think I made it clear upthread that my philosophy guides and enriches my life.

In short, your conclusion is WRONG. Dead wrong. Desire and hunger the most important things in my life? You obviously missed the parts where I mentioned my children. Don't give a crap about wanting to change myself? Do you realise that I am a recovering alcoholic? Mock anything that challenges the status quo? I mock everything indiscriminately!

James Van Praagh could have done a better job of cold reading me. Talk to the hand, loser.

 

[Z]

Just out of sheer morbid curiosity, Darren, how has your philosophy enriched your life? At least my philosophy (such as I've been told it is) seeks to pack as many pleasurable and enjoyable moments into a finite existence as is possible. And how do we gain access to more pleasurable moments? We improve ourselves and help others improve themselves.

Ultimately, the purpose of any creature is to make for themselves the best life possible. An intelligent and foresighted creature understands this means making the world a better place, helping one's neighbors, maintaining a healthy environment, etc. So the goal of any philosophy ought to be, what is the best way to make the world better so that, in turn, private existence may be improved?

-- Or to put it in a distasteful way, the ultimate purpose of any creature is self-service.

 

[arthwollipot]

My philosophy

My name's not Darren, but I'd like to answer this question as well, for lifegazer's benefit.

My philosophy, regardless of any silly internet quizzes, is basically existential. It is that we exist, like it or not, and it is up to us to find meaning in our lives. Personally I believe that there is no meaning, but that is not necessarily a bad thing.

My naturalistic spin on atheism allows me to observe the world and the universe and be awed by it without being forced to attribute it to any non-natural forces.

I look at my son on the soccer field, and I feel proud. Both because he is the product of my DNA, and also because he is the product of a wonderful and beautiful series of events which let to the production of children capable of playing soccer.

The insects in the trees, the birds, the worms in the earth - all are testament to the wonder and beauty in the universe, and I am humbled to be a part of it.

The stars, the galaxies, the quasars show me that the universe is a vast and beautiful place, and we are only a microscopic speck upon a microscopic speck. There is more out there in the universe than is imagined in lifegazer's philosophy.

Science is trying its hardest to codify and understand the universe around us. I read books such as The Elegant Universe by Brian Greene and I gape in wonder at what science is capable of. Relativity is almost within my grasp. Quantum mechanics is the elusive sprite that always wiggles from between my fingers when I think I have it. But still I chase understanding.

My purpose in the universe is to understand it, or as much of it as I can. That includes understanding people, who after all are a part of the universe. Therefore I read the Bible (even though I am an atheist) and I debate against creationists. Because every time I do I understand just a little more about the universe.

How has this enriched my life? Do you really have to ask? I am awed and humbled at the same time. I realise who and what I am, I bounce my ideas off the world and see what happens. I improve myself every day. How can I not be enriched by my philosophy?

 

[arthwollipot]

So the goal of any philosophy ought to be, what is the best way to make the world better so that, in turn, private existence may be improved?

Personally I think that the world should be made better for its own sake, not for mine.

 

[Robin]

Which Philosophy Do You Follow?

Just a little bit of fun. I, apparently, am a hybrid Existentialist/Strong Egoist.

Silly quizzes like this show just how much one's personal take on life does not fit into predefined categories.

Aaargh! It pegs me as an Existentialist. When I was 15 maybe! Another person who doesn't know what Existentialism is.

 

[arthwollipot]

Does every individual need a personal philosophy?

I just thought I'd add one more thing (and not because I'm still smarting from lifegazer's unjustified accusations). And that is that the premise of this question is flawed.

No-one can grow up without developing a philosophy of their own. Once you reach and pass puberty, and the world starts making an impact on your life, I think a bit of self-examination starts forcing itself upon you, and without some form of structure on which to hang your experiences, you would go mad.

So in essence, no, I believe that no-one can exist without coming up with some kind of philosophy at some stage in their life.

 

[RandFan]

Re: My philosophy

My philosophy, regardless of any silly internet quizzes, is basically existential. It is that we exist, like it or not, and it is up to us to find meaning in our lives. Personally I believe that there is no meaning, but that is not necessarily a bad thing.

I liked your post particularly this paragraph. Humans it has been said is the symbolic species. Of course it is turning out that we are not entirely alone in that distinction only that we are more advanced in our use of symbolism. My point is that we use symbolism because we seek meaning. Meaning is a cornerstone to intelligence and consciousness.

There is no divine purpose to life. However there is meaning even if that meaning is that we are the result of random events. The process that took us from microbe to Einstein is meaningful. There is meaning to life because we give it meaning. That's a good thing.