There are as many answers as there are those that answer, but here’s one:

“....Of all the a priori sciences of reason, therefore, mathematics alone can be learned. Philosophy—unless it be in an historical manner—cannot be learned; we can at most learn to philosophize. Philosophy is the system of all philosophical cognition. We must use this term in an objective sense, if we understand by it the archetype of all attempts at philosophizing, and the standard by which all subjective philosophies are to be judged. In this sense, philosophy is merely the idea of a possible science, which does not exist in concreto, but to which we endeavour in various ways to approximate, until we have discovered the right path to pursue—a path overgrown by the errors and illusions of sense—and the image we have hitherto tried in vain to shape has become a perfect copy of the great prototype. Until that time, we cannot learn philosophy—it does not exist; if it does, where is it, who possesses it, and how shall we know it? We can only learn to philosophize; in other words, we can only exercise our powers of reasoning in accordance with general principles, retaining at the same time, the right of investigating the sources of these principles, of testing, and even of rejecting them.

In this view philosophy is the science of the relation of all cognition to the ultimate and essential aims of human reason, and the philosopher is not merely an artist—who occupies himself with conceptions—but a lawgiver, legislating for human reason. In this sense of the word, it would be in the highest degree arrogant to assume the title of philosopher, and to pretend that we had reached the perfection of the prototype which lies in the idea alone....”
(CPR A838-9/B866-7)

What is philosophy? — Bret Bernhoft

Others surely will offer different takes on "philosophy" according to their respective preoccupations (e.g. mine is 'human' agency), so here's how I define it today:
Philosophy is the study and art of reflectively reasoning to better, more probative, questions as a way to practice living, what Socrates called, "the examined life".

Can you explain to[describe for] me what makes something a philosophy or philosophical?

At minimum, IME, "the philosophical" consists in supposing, or proposing, reflections which make explicit ordinarily implicit (i.e. unreflective) discursive uses, misuses and abuses of e.g. concepts, criteria, questions, problems, knowledge, etc. Understanding, or making explicit (i.e. problematizing), is the endless task, path, ladder ... of opposing – escaping from – "confusion, contradiction and folly" (~@unenlightened) as much as one is able.

How does one intentionally participate in philosophical dialogue?

Study dead philosophers and (honestly, non-fallaciously, charitably) discuss your studies with students living philosophically.

Where can I turn for a reliable and insightful explanation[expression] of philosophy?

Here is a link that may satisfy this query.

What is philosophy? — Bret Bernhoft

Philosophy uses philosophical methods of inquiry (logic, language, epistemology, etc) to analyze beliefs or belief systems. You can't escape philosophy, we all do it, its just a matter of whether we do it well or not. If you have beliefs about life, morality, politics, science, mathematics, family, business, then you're doing philosophy. So, all of us are philosophers to one degree or another.

What is philosophy? — Bret Bernhoft

FWIW, here's my attempt to define "philosophy", for the purposes of my personal worldview. :

Philosophy :
The ancient Greeks began to distinguish the rational search for understanding of the world from the myth-making of religion. They became skeptical of prophets & seers, who were often ambiguous or dead-wrong in their proclamations. So they decided to rely on the only source of knowledge they could trust implicitly, their own personal reasoning ability. Unfortunately, the disciples of philosophers, like those of religious founders, tended to turn their time- & culture-bound doctrines into dogmas for all times & places. But by judicious application of information from all three forms of knowing, we can enjoy the practicality of Science, the Mystery of Religion, and the Rationality of Philosophy. [See Philosophy popup]

Since modern Science has become very successful at discovering practical physical knowledge, and Religions still have mass appeal as the gateway to supernatural wisdom, Philosophy has been relgated to the nerdy niche of metaphysical understanding. So philosophers usually offer their expert opinions on a few basic questions : 1. How can we know what’s real & true? (Ontology), 2. What is the right thing to do? (Ethics), and 3. What should we believe? (Values) The latter is not about blind Faith, but about the science of Probability. Philosophy is not a practical method for influencing Nature, or other people, but only for self-control. So it’s purpose is merely to correct your own worldview, your vision of reality.
http://blog-glossary.enformationism.info/page16.html

Can you explain to me what makes something a philosophy or philosophical? — Bret Bernhoft

For me, philosophy is an activity that helps increase my awareness of how my mind works, especially why I believe what I believe and how I know what I know.

As I might practice it, it's speculation. However, the literature shows that is a specific formal philosophical pursuit.

This user has been deleted and all their posts removed.

There's something in Ambrose Bierce's definition of philosophy:

"A route of many roads leading from nowhere to nothing."

There's something in Ambrose Bierce's definition of philosophy:

"A route of many roads leading from nowhere to nothing. — Tom Storm

:up: He (or maybe Mark Twain) might have inspired

Philosophy is like being in a dark room and looking for a black cat.

(Metaphysics is like being in a dark room and looking for a black cat that isn't there.

Theology is like being in a dark room and looking for a black cat that isn't there, and shouting "I found it!")

whereas

Science is like being in a dark room looking for a black cat while using a flashlight.

That's it, 180! So far its the Epicureans that make the most sense to me. Fortunately I have spent no time looking for non existent black cats but I can see it's a popular pursuit.

A never-ending meal of infinite courses that one can enjoy without any physical sense or sensation.

Science is like being in a dark room looking for a black cat while using a flashlight.

If that's true, then philosophy is the instructions for using the flashlight.

It helps me to think of it as a historical subject. We try to understand the world and ourselves. When we arrived at the scene, when the first human beings acquired the capacity to articulate thought, we tried to comprehend what was happening.

At first we told stories. Stories usually related with dietes associated with the creation of the Earth, the rivers, the sea. Gods moved the winds and sacrifices guaranteed good fortunes. Thunder was the anger of the Gods.

At some point, we gathered in large enough numbers to refine our thinking into more precise and accurate accounts of the world, not relying on myths, but on observing the world closely.

By these means, we achieved considerable success in mathematics and parts of astronomy. But many questions pertaining to us and the world remained problematic:

How can we step on the same river twice? How can we reach a target if there are an infinite number of events separating an apple from an arrow? How do we speak of one entity being the same person if they've gone crazy? How can thought arise from matter? And so on.

Fast forward thousands of years and we get science, based on observing the world under the guidance of an explanatory theory. We reduce the entities analyzed and focus on select things to study, putting aside phenomena that interfere with a theory.

We couldn't, after all, fire a canon ball around the Earth's surface. But given certain conditions (removing friction, for instance) we find out that the same force that causes an apple to fall causes the movement of the moons and planets.

But after all this, questions still remain. Important questions and hard ones. What is a self? Do we have free will? Is the world independent of me or a product of our way of ordering the world? What is a good life? How can matter produce thought? What is causation? How many things are there in the world? And so on.

Philosophy, then, is the rational enquiry into very hard question, on topics we have barely been able to make progress in for thousands of years.

The confusion on what philosophy is likely stems from the fact that some of the best philosophers in history, were also scientists. If you asked Hume, are you a scientist or a philosopher he could not say. Same with Descartes and Kant and Leibniz and Locke and many others. To them, there was no distinction.

For the Greeks even less so.

At least that's how I think of the topic.

:up:

Thank you to everyone who has responded to this thread. I am admittedly still learning how to effectively form philosophical arguments that are informed by learning and experience. I guess I feel intimidated by the sophistication of communities such as this one, wherein active/passive members and visitors are able to so eloquently build meaning and move hearts with their philosophies. And so simply/clearly too. That is what I'd like to be able to do with my own philosophizing.

This just dawned on me! Perhaps I should've had this epiphany a long time ago, about the time I had the pleasure cum pain of having encountered paraconsistent logic and non-Euclidean geometry. Others, surely, have understood this a long time ago.

The realization: There really is no reason why we can't, shouldn't, invent/create worlds, presently only mental ones seem possible, with their own set of rules/laws; one could even build a world sans any laws/rules at all. The possibilities are endless you see. One could then simply decide to live one's life in the world one has made thus. You might want to, as a primer, look at :point: logical nihilism.

I took up an interest in philosophy about ten years ago, and since then I have learned a quite a bit; relatively speaking. — Bret Bernhoft

10 years learning about philosophy - and you've learned what and from where ?

Science is like being in a dark room looking for a black cat while using a flashlight.

If that's true, then philosophy is the instructions for using the flashlight. — T Clark

And asking why the hell do I want to find a black cat in a dark room ?

10 years learning about philosophy - and you've learned what and from where ? — Amity

Yeah, I was going to ask this but got sidetracked.

Yes, I am still gathering the pieces of what philosophy truly is. I've studied dozens of thinkers and philosophies, but primarily from an intellectual perspective, not so much a wisdom perspective.

With all of that said, to me, philosophy is about understanding truth. And getting excited when you find out that you've been wrong in your thinking for decades. Perhaps philosophy (for me) is primarily an exercise in different thinking patterns.

It sure would be interesting to involve biofeedback with philosophical training.

I find it hard not to look at philosophy as whatever inquiry isn't science. Historically, philosophy as an ongoing pursuit keeps spinning off whatever bit of itself is cleaned up enough, made precise enough to do actual research, into a science. Once upon a time, that was nothing. Then physics and biology. The early moderns are still full of not-yet psychology. There's a lot of linguistics along the way.

Philosophy seems always to be whatever's left. That can be hopeful: philosophy as a sort of minor leagues or a training ground for what will eventually become science. Or it can mean that the stubborn bits are just muddles that of course cannot be made into science. To many, too many for my taste, it means philosophy is about the Big Questions, questions science cannot help you with, because they're so, you know, Big.

And asking why the hell do I want to find a black cat in a dark room ? — Amity

It's Schrodinger's cat. We need to check to see if it is alive, dead, or both.

It's Schrodinger's cat. We need to check to see if it is alive, dead, or both. — T Clark

It's neither.

And asking why the hell do I want to find a black cat in a dark room ? — Amity

Or asking whether or not I am the black cat I'm trying to find in a dark room?

And why is this important, again?

It's neither. — 180 Proof

Yes. Thanks for the clarification.

Why do you ask?

10 years learning about philosophy - and you've learned what and from where ?
— Amity

Yeah, I was going to ask this but got sidetracked. — Tom Storm

Yeah, that happens. I note that my question was not answered by @Bret Bernhoft.

Why do you ask ?

Exactly.

Exactly.