Philosophy is good for checking our understanding of reality and expanding our consciousness but it is not the end all. It is a tool and none of the philosophies or religions are the final word of God. — Athena

Consistent with what you've written, I've often said that philosophy for me is a way to become more intellectually self-aware. I don't generally see it as a tool to accomplish practical things though. I use it more to sharpen the tools I work with. Now that I think about it, I guess that does make it a tool too.

The way I see philosophy it is a tool because philosophers have asked questions I never thought of asking and in that way it teaches us to ask questions and to see with a much broader perspective. This is far different from a youthful diet of Dick and Jane readers, fairy tales, and Bible lessons.

But I think it is also about how our brains change as we age. I live in housing for older people and I know getting older in itself does not make us better thinkers. We may gain some wisdom with life experience, but most of the older people in my life are not thinkers! However, those who do turn to philosophy or intentionally engage in debates, do develop better thinking skills and are less apt to be caught up in the popular mindset of the moment. Stopping to think, instead of just reacting, is a learned habit, and those of us who actively nurtured the habit become better thinkers because of the accumulation of thoughts and experiences over a lifetime. We just have more information to work with and hopefully, the time to ponder what is important in life and how might that be achieved. It is with that experience we see what is wrong with Utopian ideas. We realize a lot of good ideas do not get good results because it is not compatible with our nature.

The huge money giveaway we have just been through resulting in inflation and talk of doing more of the same, looks like a bad idea to me today, but I when I was younger I would have thought it is a good idea. I have gotten more conservative.

The huge money giveaway we have just been through resulting in inflation and talk of doing more of the same — Athena

How do you figure?

I should not have mentioned the economic problem because that is a different subject. My point is I see such matters differently than when I was young. I started this thread because I am curious about what I perceive as a change in thinking and the possibility that we tend to become more conservative with age?

However, I love economics and could start a thread to explore economists Thomas Robert Malthus' and David Ricardo's differences of opinion which would get into what is good or wrong with government giveaways. Despite their differences, they remained good friends for life and used their arguments to develop their own thinking.

In this thread, I am wanting to understand why I see life so differently today! Has this happened to anyone else? I read that as we age we gain a sense of meaning to all those facts we learned. The young absorb the facts but don't have a sense of meaning until they experience what the facts mean. Like a young person volunteering for military service and knowing nothing of the meaning of being in war. The old warrior may answer the call to duty but will do so with a very different sense of what he is getting himself into.

Going back to its origins, philosophy involved the quest for self-knowledge and, as philosophy has become increasingly about analysis of concepts and understanding science, the aspect of self-knowledge may get lost at times. In some ways, the emphasis on self-knowledge may fall into the domain of psychology. However, even that may be more focused on the outer forms of behaviour and thinking about oneself.

However, I am not suggesting that self-knowledge is mere introspection, because self-knowledge is about feedback from others and self-knowledge. Therapies, including the cognitive behavioral therapies may help, and there is an overlap on questioning assumptions behind feelings. There is also an overlap between CBT and Stoicism.

You are definitely right that technological advances mean that people are becoming more robotic, less inclined to looking within themselves. As far as whether people change focus may vary. Jung saw the second half of life as more about inner growth, but if people have not been encouraged to think about their inner lives in the first place, this will not happen necessarily. Also, his understanding of introversion and extraversion is important. That is because often in popular thinking the terms are used to describe stereotypes of people who are sociable or withdrawn. Jung, who actually, as far as I am aware, invented the terms, was speaking more of the way people are oriented towards the inner or outer. Of course, it is not simple because everyone lives in both categories of experience. Nevertheless, there is an increasing move in technological society to the exterior. For example, even the value of the arts may be often flattened into the fast culture of entertainment.

My point is I see such matters differently than when I was young. — Athena

As well you should! The advantage of aging (provided one still has all of one's marbles) is that we gain perspective on what we learned and experienced when we were young, and added on up to the present. New learning and new experiences contribute to the sharpness of our perception.

Most older people become more conservative -- not necessarily in the political sense of the term. Aging bodies have to be more careful, lest they fall and break bones. Perception isn't quite as sharp. Our productive years are over, so we are operating on stored resources. We can't afford (figuratively and literally) to take big risks.

Because old people have been around for a few decades they have seen some bright ideas that did not pan out, while some tried and true methods did work (and visa versa). The result is more caution.

In this thread, I am wanting to understand why I see life so differently today! Has this happened to anyone else? I read that as we age we gain a sense of meaning to all those facts we learned. The young absorb the facts but don't have a sense of meaning until they experience what the facts mean. Like a young person volunteering for military service and knowing nothing of the meaning of being in war. The old warrior may answer the call to duty but will do so with a very different sense of what he is getting himself into. — Athena

My father was a staunch conservative and I've always thought that I would be more conservative with increased age, just as folk wisdom suggests. That has not happened though. If anything, the more I learn the more progressive I become, even venturing into the woke end of the pool.

I think people may be born with a kind of nature that predisposes them to one way or the other and no amount of learning has much impact on changing it. They say it has to do with openness to change or willingness to try new things.

This is something of an aside

Yesterday I watched a short Deutsche Welle documentary Are Humans Getting Dumber and Dumber?

During much of the 20th century, the "Flynn Effect" showed average IQ increasing a few points every decade across different populations. The increase seems to have stopped--again, across different populations. So, what's doing it?

Deutsche Welle didn't provide a definitive answer, but 2 suggested explanations seemed compelling.

a) We have off-loaded some cognitive tasks onto devices, tasks like navigating, calculation, remembering information, and so on. None of those are trivial tasks, and neglecting them may result in less mental agility. Map reading, remembering routes, doing arithmetic, remembering telephone numbers, etc. exercise vital mental abilities. Reading books and long articles helps us maintain focus over time. We're kind of screwed if we can't pay attention for more than 3 or 4 minutes at a time.

b) We are immersed in a wash of manufactured chemicals from agriculture and industry which may be having deleterious effects on our brains. Chemicals could have a direct effect (getting drunk kills off a batch of neurons), or it's a knock-on effect of various chemicals that resemble hormones that could affect brain function.

Individuals can't do much about chemicals, but they can change their use of gadgets and do more long reading.

I think people may be born with a kind of nature that predisposes them to one way or the other — praxis

I think we are born with quite a few predispositions. It isn't that we are born "Republican" or "Socialist" of course. It's more about how we respond to risk, how we seek kinship with others, how we negotiate social roles.

EDIT: 3/6/23 10:19, CST The following paragraph is retracted.

I suspect that people with a high level of personal confidence, self-efficacy, agency, and so on are less likely to seek social shelter in conservative groups. They are more likely to be comfortable with change and risk taking. Some people seem risk-averse early in life, and some are more likely to seek risk.

I suspect that people with a high level of personal confidence, self-efficacy, agency, and so on are less likely to seek social shelter in conservative groups. They are more likely to be comfortable with change and risk taking. Some people seem risk-averse early in life, and some are more likely to seek risk. — BC

Your suspicions don't entirely correspond with my experience. Though I'm on the independent side I've always lacked self-confidence and as much as I'd like to shelter in conservative circles there are aspects of it that I can't abide due to the aforementioned independent nature. Also, I'm risk-averse. I don't like to gamble, for instance, and in sports I've always erred on the side of caution.

I very much like new experiences though, pleasant ones of course, and I think that I'm open-minded, so I think it has more to do with openness than riskiness. I think this is why, for example, the threat of 'open borders' is so motivating for conservatives. So much disinformation surrounds the issue that it's hard to determine what a sensible policy is anymore.

The way I see philosophy it is a tool because philosophers have asked questions I never thought of asking and in that way it teaches us to ask questions and to see with a much broader perspective. — Athena

This is something I've been thinking about. I agree with what you wrote about seeing with a broader perspective, but I see the first part of your statement differently. I came to philosophy with the questions I wanted answered. After 10 years as a cabinetmaker and 30 years as an engineer, I wanted to put into words the things I had learned and see if I could expand on that. This is why I'm so interested in metaphysics and epistemology. I want to be able to clearly say what I know and how I know it.

Stopping to think, instead of just reacting, is a learned habit, and those of us who actively nurtured the habit become better thinkers because of the accumulation of thoughts and experiences over a lifetime. — Athena

I agree with this. I've certainly become a better thinker here on the forum. On the other hand, I was always a thinker. I joke sometimes that I'm still 17 years old. Not my body, certainly, but the way I see the world.

I have gotten more conservative. — Athena

I started out liberal and I think I'm just as liberal now. I would say my liberality is more nuanced. I'm also less likely to see political decision making as something that has to have winners and losers. I guess I'd say I'm liberal in outlook, but moderate in attitude. There are ideas I believe are the right thing to do, but I don't insist that I always get my way.

If anything, the more I learn the more progressive I become... — praxis

The same is true for me, although I'd like to think I have a better grasp of the intricacies of the issues.

I think people may be born with a kind of nature that predisposes them to one way or the other and no amount of learning has much impact on changing it. They say it has to do with openness to change or willingness to try new things. — praxis

There certainly is truth in this, but I think it's possible to open people up to new experiences.

I suspect that people with a high level of personal confidence, self-efficacy, agency, and so on are less likely to seek social shelter in conservative groups. They are more likely to be comfortable with change and risk taking. Some people seem risk-averse early in life, and some are more likely to seek risk. — BC

I'm with @praxis on this. I think this is an overstatement. I'm sure it's a common attitude among those on the liberal/socialist side, but it's a bit self-serving and it's disrespectful of those we disagree with.

Please bring your experiences into alignment with my inerrant suspicions.

I'm sure it's a common attitude among those on the liberal/socialist side, but it's a bit self-serving and it's disrespectful of those we disagree with. — T Clark

Of course! Every generalization about personality, politics, predispositions, etc. is going to be full of holes. I'm pretty risk tolerant, open to new experiences, at least left-liberal, etc. BUT contrarily I am opposed to open borders. I'm neither xenophobic nor neophobic. In my humble (probably inerrant) opinion, sovereign nations have the responsibility to their citizens to control their borders, both for trade and the movement of people. It may be that border control will amount to open borders, as it was during much of the 19th century for the US (at least for Europeans). Or not, depending on policy.

I approve of legal, authorized, planned immigration. Immigration is one of the reasons the US doesn't have the very problematic demographics which China, Korea, Japan, and much of Europe have, where the low birthrate spells serious economic trouble.

I suspect that people with a high level of personal confidence, self-efficacy, agency, and so on are less likely to seek social shelter in conservative groups — BC

Possibly, but there are those in the immigrant community who are industrious and eager to succeed and choose the Republican Party because it tends to remove governmental restrictions on business growth.

As for wisdom in old age, I am as old or older than anyone here I suspect, and I find that I value patience more than when young.

Please bring your experiences into alignment with my inerrant suspicions. — BC

Keep in mind I'm much younger than you are. Why, you were already walking, talking, and wetting your bed before I was even born.

For me, the last decade or so I've been reflectively summing up a lifetime of study and peak experiences, hardships and beneficial failures. I'm still on the endless road, but these days looking back and forward simultaneously. Philosophy has been a whetstone for honing metacognitive skills, or "tools" as @T Clark says, which widen and deepen understanding (of misery, ignorance, unreality, conflict, dying), wherein, IME, 'knowing thy self-limits' is only a small, though disproportionately significant, part.

I have become more culturally conservative (small "C") with age and yet less politically Conservative (not that I ever was so in my left-anarchist youth), just more careful, or as @BC says more personally "risk-adverse". I've always been both anti-auto(theo/pluto/techno)cratic and anti-utopian as I am today. (NB: Perhaps, though, I'm a touch millenarian in the form of 'the coming technology singularity'... ) Anyway, "woke" is a joke to me, though maybe a necessary (or zeitgeist) joke. I'm disgusted with the decadent, secondary fronts of "identity-politics" (particularly, though not exclusively, in the US) and social media-infantilizing trigger of reactive populisms "on both sides of the aisle" even among the marginally better educated and managed polities of the EU.

Growing old is inevitable but it's abundantly clear growing-up – outgrowing childish "fears" & "hopes" (i.e. superstitions & faiths) is not. Well along in my 60th year, I find myself even more cognitively isolated from my peers (and family) than I'd felt in previous decades. C'est la vie. Aging and philosophy and some hard-won worldliness have made me more solitary and less lonely than I was in my 20s-30s. Bruises and scars can be good company. And books. No doubt many of us are here on TPF as a respite from the daily crucible of companionable silence and small talk (... with ourselves). Or just for kicks. :cool:

I find that I value patience more than when young. — jgill

:up:

BUT contrarily I am opposed to open borders. — BC

I think you missed the point. I seriously doubt you believe someone like Trump when they say that the border is currently open and this fear inspires you to act (vote or donate) in a particular way.

My opponents on the border issue are actually not conservatives, Republicans, or Trumpettes. Rather, they are my left liberal kin who are focused on the individuals and their hard-lot circumstances and feel we should admit them all because... we're a big, rich country and the would-be immigrants are from little poor countries, and they deserve a chance to succeed in America, etc.

I recognize the hard lot circumstances and aspirations of migrants and immigrants. Unfortunately, their aspirations can not set our national policy. IF we decide to officially let them all in and call for more, fine. Unfortunately for a lot of US-bound people, we haven't decided to do that.

When I look up “open borders” just now to reassure myself that I have a clue to its current meaning the results are what I assumed, unrestricted access, like going from one state to another. I don’t think that any American politicians support that level of access, but I could be wrong. Politics in America grow increasingly nutty by the day.

As difficult as it is to exceed 100% nut content, American politics is nuttier now. I don't know of any politicians in office who are working for open national borders either. It comes from individuals and groups focused on migrant issues.

Some socialists call for an abolition of national borders. I'm not in favor of that either, even as a card-carrying socialist. (Oh, maybe after the Revolution is complete all round the world, and workers have crushed the capitalists everywhere... maybe then. Please don't hold your breath waiting for that to happen.)

Good, thoughtful post.

I have become more culturally conservative (small "C") with age and yet less politically Conservative — 180 Proof

This is true for me too.

Growing old is inevitable but it's abundantly clear growing-up – outgrowing childish "fears" & "hopes" (i.e. superstitions & faiths)) is not. — 180 Proof

This is fine, although you and I often classify different things as "superstitions & faiths."

I find myself even more cognitively isolated from my peers (and family) than I'd felt in previous decades. — 180 Proof

My daughter has always been intellectually active and we have lots to talk about. My sons were lazy and stubborn when they were in school, neither finished college. Their grades were always mediocre. Suddenly I discovered in the 20s that they were much more intellectually sophisticated than I had given them credit for. They write well, read a lot, and have interesting ideas about politics and human nature. It's been really gratifying to be able to have the kinds of discussions we have here on the forum with all three of my children. Those discussions are very loud - my wife leaves the room. Of course, they are all at least as liberal as I am without the smoothing of sharp edges that time has given me.

Well along in my 60th year, I find myself even more cognitively isolated from my peers (and family) than I'd felt in previous decades. — 180 Proof

Do you live in a very religious social environment? I find one person I can talk to freely is enough, but less than that is rough.

I discovered in the 20s that they were much more intellectually sophisticated than I had given them credit for. — T Clark

Perhaps prohibition resulted in clearer heads.

Perhaps prohibition resulted in clearer heads. — praxis

My elder son is 37, back in school, and getting good grades. He says when he was in high school he didn't give a shit.

This statement has been sent back to the Politburo for further consideration.

I suspect that people with a high level of personal confidence, self-efficacy, agency, and so on are less likely to seek social shelter in conservative groups. They are more likely to be comfortable with change and risk taking. Some people seem risk-averse early in life, and some are more likely to seek risk.

Do you live in a very religious social environment? — bert1

Not really. Due mostly to illness the last several months, I spend a lot of time with my mother at her place in a senior citizen community. She's devoutly Catholic and my younger brother and sis-in-law are quite "spiritual but not religious". All of my old friends live in different time zones and most have "aged into" religiosity and "virtue-signaling" suburbanity. FWIW, the Trappist "vow of silence" has always appealed to me. :halo:

Jung saw the second half of life as more about inner growth, but if people have not been encouraged to think about their inner lives in the first place, this will not happen necessarily. — Jack Cummins

I am comforted by that thought. However, the second one about technology leading to people being more concerned about what is external to them than knowing one's self, distresses me. Might that diminish our humanity and heavens forbid lead to wars? Liberal education would promote more self awareness than educating our young to be products for industry.

Your words are interesting considering I have left my home for a couple of hours because the person in it is watching the 700 Club. A Christian program that raises my passionate dislike of the religion because of the likes of the Evangelical Christians and their politics in the US. The person in my home, takes great comfort in the 700 Club explanation of God and reality, and with your words, I see his lack of self awareness. He has a traumatic brain injury that damaged his ability to reason and function. It serves him well to have the 700 Club reality instead of dealing with his own reality. That is saying the failure to know ourselves and clinging to another reality is not just the effect of technology. I see religion and technology as both worshiping a God capable of bringing us to perfection. Whereas, I come to death with no defenses or other-defined reality. I have to search more or less on my own to determine my values and why I have those values and come to be peace with my life and the end of it.

Most older people become more conservative -- not necessarily in the political sense of the term. Aging bodies have to be more careful, lest they fall and break bones. Perception isn't quite as sharp. Our productive years are over, so we are operating on stored resources. We can't afford (figuratively and literally) to take big risks.

Because old people have been around for a few decades they have seen some bright ideas that did not pan out, while some tried and true methods did work (and visa versa). The result is more caution. — BC

Very nicely said. I have wondered if what is happening to my brain, the increased awareness of perspective, and things that work and things that lead to trouble, and a sense of enlightenment, be happening if I didn't think my life is behind me? I would love to go roller skating but the risk of breaking is too great. I would love to travel but if I broke down in a mountain pass would I have the physical ability to get to safety? :lol: My body just is not user friendly despite my many hours of daily exercise in a pool and a weight room. That makes me very cautious! And it goes with thinking my life is behind me because I am so physically vulnerable and limited. I can't do this or do that so I have lots of time to think. I am not going to achieve any great goals, but maybe I can discover in books, lectures, this forum, and my own inner self, a peace with joy. Will I die with a smile on face, being pleased with the life I have had? Will I gain an understanding of life that my those I leave behind will value?

I started out liberal and I think I'm just as liberal now. I would say my liberality is more nuanced. I'm also less likely to see political decision making as something that has to have winners and losers. I guess I'd say I'm liberal in outlook, but moderate in attitude. There are ideas I believe are the right thing to do, but I don't insist that I always get my way. — T Clark

I like all your statements and this one pushes my buttons and puts me on my soup box to lecture about the value of democracy! Many ancient people, not just the Greeks, realized if we don't get it right, things will go wrong. Ideally democracy is about getting it right. I was hoping to complete a book about democracy before I die but that ain't going to happen. My brain has become like a large lake, instead of a river moving fast from here to there. My thinking never was strongly linear and now it is even less so.
Perhaps we all have a dream of leaving something valuable before we cross over.

I take heart knowing so many, many people are also trying to get things right, but I see the Christian notion of what is right as more autocratic than democratic. Both are necessary, but how do we balance the autocracy with the democracy? How do we get things right so, if like some Greeks believed, we come back, we come back to a life we want to live. Don't we all want the future to be a life we would like to live? Do we want to turn the decision over to a God that is unbelievable, or technological society that has lost its humanity?

I think our experience with reasoning and our maturity is so vital to the future. When I was young I counted on God and a lucky rabbits foot. I advanced to witchcraft and herbs. :lol: I finally found philosophy but I have more questions than answers.