Lots of good articulations of the 'purpose' of philosophy.

I came to TPF as a lay philosopher, rediscovering interests I had set aside due to no longer teaching a high school intro to philosophy class.

When I taught said class, I needed to connect to a discipline I had little experience with. So I read a lot - including back issues of "Philosophy Now". Some of it was beyond me, but I found myself drawn to discussions of AI. Fifteen years later, I find so much of that reading validated by what is happening with AI, and how those readings help me understand the issues today.

Which leads me to ask - what questions of an urgent / topical nature today can be best addressed, or perhaps just effectively addressed, with philosophy? Are there discussions on subjects now that will seem just as urgent in 15 years as discussions of AI have proven to be? I would love to hear some predictions, or be pointed towards urgent current topics in philosophy.

Canadian philosopher Joseph Heath noted on his substack that many of his colleagues seem to be 'sitting out' many fraught contemporary subjects. I imagine a lot of TPFers are closer to Heath than myself in terms of contact with this academic world - is he correct about this?

So much of what we know and do is unstated and unconscious. For instance, we use language fluidly, and so clearly we all 'know' the rules of grammar, but when asked to explain them we are often at a loss. Words too: we 'know' what they mean, as we use them with ease, but we grope for definitions. The same goes for concepts, purposes, ideologies, worldviews.

And so goes the majority of our lives, acting without knowing why, doing without quite knowing what we do. This is the unexamined life. Philosophy remedies this: it can make the implicit explicit, the unconscious conscious.

As we bring the unconscious to light, more often then not, we realize that these implicit beliefs we've carried with us don't really make sense. Then we have the opportunity to replace the unconscious and irrational with the conscious and rational. This is growth, the transition to true adulthood that so many make all too late, or never at all. The conscious cultivation of a worldview which is consonant with the world, rather than an artifact of upbringing.

This is the purpose of philosophy. — hypericin

:100: :fire:

Which leads me to ask - what questions of an urgent / topical nature today can be best addressed, or perhaps just effectively addressed, with philosophy? Are there discussions on subjects now that will seem just as urgent in 15 years as discussions of AI have proven to be? I would love to hear some predictions, or be pointed towards urgent current topics in philosophy. — Jeremy Murray

I don’t think any question requires philosophy, and certainly not if it’s to be settled by an educative political process. Seems to me all matters are settled by the ongoing conversations societies have with each other. These are, of course, based on philosophically derived notions, but not in a systematic or deliberate way. And our values will change as the older folk die off and the younger, more progressive types dominate (they in turn will be the conservative fogies of tomorrow).

I have to confess to not caring about AI. There’s a lot of alarmist verbiage written about it. My view is that any reading or tentative understandings of the matter will do nothing to manage or deal with any changes coming.

Canadian philosopher Joseph Heath noted on his substack that many of his colleagues seem to be 'sitting out' many fraught contemporary subjects — Jeremy Murray

I'm a big fan of sitting out controversies and pseudo problems. Many either go away or are integrated into culture as the old folk and their values die out.

Which leads me to ask - what questions of an urgent / topical nature today can be best addressed, or perhaps just effectively addressed, with philosophy? — Jeremy Murray

My apologies on my late reply.

Philosophy will always be needed to dive into linguistic assumptions. Good, evil, God, knowledge, etc. As for the modern day, I see a few. Granted, I could be completely wrong as assessing the important things of today is notoriously difficult, while hindsight is usually 20/20.

Trans gender issues. This was literally made for philosophers to tackle. What are male and female is science, but cultural associations with sex, aka gender, is a goldmine of philosophical discussion.

AI 'life' and mind. AI is going to challenge us to start thinking what a life and a mind are. As it continues to evolve, we're going to find AI that will be remarkably intelligent. Of course, it won't have feelings. Does that mean we treat it as a life, or do are things that cannot feel exempt from fair treatment?

Interpersonal connections in an internet world. We still have much to discuss and think about in regards to internet behavior and human evolution.

What are male and female is science, but cultural associations with sex, aka gender, is a goldmine of philosophical discussion. — Philosophim

Imo, "trans issues" are psychosociological or anthropological much more so than "philosophical".

Notice how in traditional culture, but also in many situations in modern culture, asking questions is the domain of the person who holds the higher status.
— baker

I’ve not noticed that. Certainly, in the cultures I know here, people of all status commonly ask difficult questions and are sometimes insolent while doing so. — Tom Storm

Ask questions of whom?
And yes, they are insolent: because being of lower status, one isn't supposed to ask questions, at all.

In Australian culture low status workers habitually question and sometimes harass the management and ruling classes.

There you go: they harass.

Of course one may very well be cognitively and physically able to ask a question. But whether it will be considered appropriate to do so, in any particular instance, is quite another matter.

You may very well come from an enlightened family where such questions are common. In many families such questions are off limits, yelled at, and discouraged. — Philosophim

Sometimes, the only appropriate place for a particular person to ask about the things that concern them is the privacy of their diary.

It's naive to think that one could talk about just anything with just anyone in just any situation. Even professional philosophers are not keen to discuss just anything with just anyone in just any situation.

Does that mean that philosophy is a fool's enterprise? No, its an ideal that every human being struggles with. We all have a bit of ego, and we all fail at thinking at times. The point is to get back up. Yes, the pressures of the world and yourself may have won today, but there's always the next day. Never stop thinking and never stop questioning even basic assumptions and outlooks. That is what pushes us forward. That is the purpose of philosophy. — Philosophim

People who merely think a lot, to the point of thinking too much, tend to end up in institutions with white padded cells.

While I sympathize with you when it comes to noticing how limited the opportunities for open discussion are --


philosophy comes down to knowing the right time, the right place, and the right people with whom to bring up a particular topic (whether the topic is specifically "philosophical" or not).

Imo, "trans issues" are psychosociological or anthropological much more so than "philosophical". — 180 Proof

And issues of mind are more neuroscience, but that doesn't mean philosophy doesn't have anything to contribute.

Trans has philosophy of mind, ontology, ethics, and rights to say the least. If trans gender is not a philosophical issue, nothing is.

Sometimes, the only appropriate place for a particular person to ask about the things that concern them is the privacy of their diary. — baker

But you are asking them. That's the point.

It's naive to think that one could talk about just anything with just anyone in just any situation. — baker

Certainly. But you don't let other stop you from asking those questions on your own. And sometimes you get answers that need to be spread to other people bravely and without cowardice.

For me intellectual loneliness is about wanting deep philosophical talks. The idea that "I'm so smart and everyone else isn't," is immature and an ego trap. I talk to people all the time about ideas that they may not be comfortable hearing. I give everyone a chance. I am surprised more than not that most people actually want that, they're just afraid to do it first because they're thinking like the ego trap above.

If trans gender is not a philosophical issue, nothing is. — Philosophim

Well, at lease since Parmenides, "nothing" certainly is a "philosophical issue", we agree on that much.

Well, at lease since Parmenides, "nothing" certainly is a "philosophical issue", we agree on that. — 180 Proof

Ha! Clever reply 180 Proof.

Well, at lease since Parmenides, "nothing" certainly is a "philosophical issue", we agree on that.
— 180 Proof

Ha! Clever reply 180 Proof. — Philosophim

Das nicht nichtet.

Ask questions of whom?
And yes, they are insolent: because being of lower status, one isn't supposed to ask questions, at all. — baker

No.

1) Lower-status people = unemployed, homeless, First Nations, gig workers — ask tough questions of their bosses, or of police, or other authorities, local government workers, welfare workers, etc.

Insolent = rude — e.g., “Hey, you fuckin' pig, why don’t you do some real work instead of bothering us? You're a fuckin' dog!” (Food delivery guy on a bicycle to policeman.)

There you go: they harass. — baker

I’m not sure why you write “there you go" as if you believe that you are indirectly 'proving soemthing. Say what you mean.