Socrates may have hoped to fix the political problems of Athens — Gnomon
Aristotle added the quest for practical knowledge of the physical world (Science) — Gnomon
Socrates' metaphysical admonition to "know thyself". — Gnomon
Philosophy is the systematized study of general and fundamental questions, such as those about existence, reason, knowledge, values, mind, and language. — Gnomon
Sure, philosophy, like plumbing, can be done very badly. And when it is done badly, it is smelly and messy.
Is the answer to not do any plumbing? — Banno
-Not really, but feel free to describe different meanings.Love of wisdom can mean different things. — Fooloso4
-No that's not true. Problem solving is an inescapable side effect, a pragmatic necessity that bind any wise claim about our world.. The assumption here is that to be wise is to solve problems in the world. — Fooloso4
-It doesn't have a specific direction. Inner problems are also part of this world.(if I understand you correctly, feel free to correct me).It is outward directed. — Fooloso4
This view characterizes modern philosophy and is grounded in scientific advances and the control of nature. The ancients were more concerned with self-knowledge. How to live versus how to change the world. — Fooloso4
-That's true ! I must say though I was pretty sure we were going to disagree on this one!You and I are often in agreement about philosophical issues, but I disagree with just about all of your points here. — T Clark
- I agree , words don't have absolute meanings, they have common usages and they tend to change over time.No surprise - the definition and meaning of metaphysics is one of the most contentious and confusing issues on the forum and, I assume, in philosophy in general. — T Clark
I can only boil it down to one thing:"our love to arrive to wise statements fuels our intellectual endeavors". I find it really simple and precise. — Nickolasgaspar
Love of wisdom can mean different things.
— Fooloso4
-Not really, but feel free to describe different meanings. — Nickolasgaspar
I can only boil it down to one thing:"our love to arrive to wise statements fuels our intellectual endeavors". — Nickolasgaspar
No that's not true. — Nickolasgaspar
-It doesn't have a specific direction. Inner problems are also part of this world.(if I understand you correctly, feel free to correct me). — Nickolasgaspar
Any type of "knowledge-" even "self-knowledge" is evaluated by its empirical results. (the way you live and the way you can change your world)./quote]
Look at what happens in the Republic when the philosopher is compelled to return to the city/cave. Socrates was found guilty of corrupting the youth. There is clear empirical evidence of philosophy's corruptive influence. They came to question the beliefs and values of their ancestors.
How we evaluate empirical results can differ depending on our state of self-knowledge, with what we value and take to be important.
— Nickolasgaspar
From your health metrics to your impact in your world ...we can use them to see whether the "knowledge" you accumulated did help you to take wise decisions. — Nickolasgaspar
-its more than ok!I don't disagree (how can I, when I have no real view on the matter?) but I'd like to explore this with you some more if that's ok. — Tom Storm
-True. As humans we are curious and we value learning facts about our world. Its human nature. We observe it in small kids asking "why this/why that" all the time. We observe it in "older kids" who go on and make up their own "answers" and what is right or wise to do (religions with rules traditions and dogma).Is not a 'wise statement' always measured or understood against some form of value system or worldview? How do you account for the perspectival nature of such values? What is wise for some may seem like a banal nothing to others. — Tom Storm
Sure, but that doesn't reduce the value of wisdom in a claim! i.e. The value is not affected by the magnitude of our excitement. i.e. An order "don't use an elevator during an earthquake" is wise to be followed and we teach it to our children even if it sound banal to grown ups who live in tall buildings.What is wise for some may seem like a banal nothing to others. — Tom Storm
-That's a very good question! Natural Philosophy abandon the Academic "ship" and became an independent Philosophical "category", established really strict peer reviewing process and high standards of evaluation just to be sure for the quality of Wisdom in its Theoretical Frameworks.What does philosophy tell us about identifying the wise from the faux wise? — Tom Storm
I think we have a misunderstanding here.To arrive at wise statements is not the goal of Socratic philosophy. Socrates wisdom is knowledge of ignorance. Knowing you are ignorant is only the first step. The question is: how best to live knowing we do no know how best to live. It is not about statements or intellectual endeavors, but about how best to live. — Fooloso4
-No I don't mean that. Bunge points out that when a statement is wise,it can be used to address real world issues. (sorry for rejecting your argument but I think it will complicate this discussion even more).If you mean that it is not true that to be wise is to solve problems in the world, then we are in agreement against Bunge. — Fooloso4
-Lets not go there,its irrelevant to the Nature of Philosophy.Try finding an example of a well accepted wise statement that isn't based on verified knowledge(any type).Consider Plato's Republic. It is not intended to be a plan for an actual city. It is made clear that such a city is highly improbable. The city in speech is said to be to see the soul writ large, and this for the purpose of seeing what justice is. For a soul to be just is possible. A just city is not something he even aims at. If this city were to be made actual we would not think it just. — Fooloso4
-This is why Objective Empirical Verification is necessary for any statement in order to be acknowledged as "wise". This is why Mario includes "problem solving" and Aristotle includes Epistemology and Physika in his method.What is the measure of whether or not a decision was wise? If someone is not wise they might think an unwise decision wise. Someone might accumulate knowledge of how to attain a certain result and think it wise when they attain it, but there is a difference between getting what you want and what is wise to want. — Fooloso4
She started describing the historic sequence of political philosophies and how the changes in metaphysics proceeded. That's something I've thought about a lot, but more in the precinct of ontology than ethics and politics. I haven't spent as much time thinking about them. I think that's because I live my life mostly through my intellect and I'm most interested in becoming more self-aware about how I think. — T Clark
You seem to imply that the intellect has little to do with ethics and politics... — Banno
So on a rough line, which approach, which perspective, comes closer to the interests you express here - Bunge's "real man" approach, decisive and practical, or Midgley's open, piecemeal, remedial approach? — Banno
You are confusing Socrate's interest in a specific topic (how best to live) with the overarching Philosophical method. — Nickolasgaspar
His famous quotes, which btw were wise statements, were the "tools" he used to make sense of that aspect of Human life. — Nickolasgaspar
Philosophy goal is wisdom, a philosophers goal is to understand a phenomenon (i.e. human nature) by arriving wise statements. — Nickolasgaspar
sorry for rejecting your argument but I think it will complicate this discussion even more — Nickolasgaspar
-Lets not go there,its irrelevant to the Nature of Philosophy. — Nickolasgaspar
-This is why Objective Empirical Verification is necessary for any statement in order to be acknowledged as "wise". — Nickolasgaspar
Aristotle includes Epistemology and Physika in his method. — Nickolasgaspar
(980a)All men naturally desire knowledge.
(982a)Thus it is clear that Wisdom is knowledge of certain principles and causes.
I hadn't even thought of this possibility. Can you say some more? — Tom Storm
It may be irrelevant to what you think of as the nature of philosophy, but there are different kinds of philosophy with different questions, concerns, methods, and answers. Socratic philosophy is concerned with human being and the self, that is, with particular persons, oneself and others. — Fooloso4
There are various philosophical methods. Philosophical methods are not for the sake of method. The method is not independent of what it is one seeks to know or understand or clarify, or, the case you are defending, the problems it is trying to solve. The latter is a part not the whole — Fooloso4
-Again, irrelevant! He made observations of the phenomenon in questions and he arrived to a wise claim.Statements do not stand alone, they are part of his dialectical method. Statements are subject to elenchus. An account defending statements in response to questioning must be given. Socratic philosophy is not about making or collecting "wise statements". It is zetetic skepticism. — Fooloso4
Same error you confuse the content with the quality that provides philosophical value at a statement!There are philosophers who eschew talk of wisdom. For Socratic philosophy is the desire for wisdom, a desire that is never fulfilled. A goal that is never reached. The question of human nature is only a part of the larger questions of the the just, the beautiful, and the good, as well as that of the whole. — Fooloso4
That is not what I rejected. I was referring to Plato's/Socratessorry for rejecting your argument but I think it will complicate this discussion even more
— Nickolasgaspar
As I see it, the question of what philosophy is cannot be separated from criticism of it. Questioning Bunge's assumption that the purpose of philosophy is to solve problems does not complicate the discussion, it is at the root of it. — Fooloso4
It may be irrelevant to what you think of as the nature of philosophy, but there are different kinds of philosophy with different questions, concerns, methods, and answers. Socratic philosophy is concerned with human being and the self, that is, with particular persons, oneself and others. — Fooloso4
Any objective , empirical data that allow a reality check over our conclusions. We will need an example.What is the objective empirical verification that informs self-knowledge? — Fooloso4
Solving problems is only an inescapable side effect . After all certaib principles and causes allow science to solve problems.Aristotle includes Epistemology and Physika in his method.
— Nickolasgaspar
Aristotle's Metaphysics begins:
All men naturally desire knowledge.
(980a)
and goes on to say:
Thus it is clear that Wisdom is knowledge of certain principles and causes.
(982a)
Knowledge of principles and causes is not knowledge of how to solve problems. — Fooloso4
anyone with a PhD) and with important contributions. — Nickolasgaspar
He has major contributions to Philosophy of mind, language and social philosophy.Some of the people you mentioned are considered philosophers — like John Searle — but as I mentioned before, I see them as mostly academics and fail to see any real contribution. May be good teachers— but that’s different. — Mikie
Are you claiming that there are philosophical methods that ignore those two basics steps(all our epistemology ) but they still managed to steer our frameworks to wisdom? — Nickolasgaspar
How one can even make any judgements without having actual material to judge? — Nickolasgaspar
-Again, irrelevant! He made observations of the phenomenon in questions and he arrived to a wise claim. — Nickolasgaspar
Same error you confuse the content with the quality that provides philosophical value at a statement! — Nickolasgaspar
That is not what I rejected. I was referring to Plato's/Socrates — Nickolasgaspar
Again, same error....the content of a philosophical Inquiry is irrelevant on how we evaluate the final product. — Nickolasgaspar
Our (or Socrates) conclusions need to have a specific quality (wisdom) in order to be philosophical. — Nickolasgaspar
Any objective , empirical data that allow a reality check over our conclusions. We will need an example. — Nickolasgaspar
Solving problems is only an inescapable side effect — Nickolasgaspar
After all certaib principles and causes allow science to solve problems. — Nickolasgaspar
First of all they have PhD's (doctor of philosophy) so technically they all are philosophers. — Nickolasgaspar
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.