Thread: Why Philosophy is pointless

Every time i think of philosophy I cringe. I belive it to be the most time wasting topic.

I seems to me that questions like "why are we here", "what is truth" "what is reality", "what what makes us human", the list goes on, that if ansewered, wouldent really help the world. We are still stuck in this hell-hole with more problems than we can solve.

I hate to be all humanitarian (im not really), but wouldent solving world problems (like starvation and disease) be a better use of time than wondering "why?".




"Why do you stand around agrueing about the existence of gods and the truths of man while your beloved world tears itself apart with hate, anger, ignorance and fear?"

-Yours truely-

Originally Posted by Nj14

Every time i think of philosophy I cringe. I belive it to be the most time wasting topic.

I seems to me that questions like "why are we here", "what is truth" "what is reality", "what what makes us human", the list goes on, that if ansewered, wouldent really help the world. We are still stuck in this hell-hole with more problems than we can solve.

I hate to be all humanitarian (im not really), but wouldent solving world problems (like starvation and disease) be a better use of time than wondering "why?".

I agree that some philosophical topics are just a waste of time, but not all of it is pointless. It stresses critical thinking skills which are essential for society.

Thankfully Nj14 there aren't more people like you.

I would try to explain it to you, but to understand my syntax and diction you need a certain level of intelligence that you obviously do not have.

NEVER sympathize with people like this. The last time someone like this came on a fair number of intelligent people responded compassionately. DO NOT DO THAT, they need to get it into their heads that their ideas are wrong.

Originally Posted by Cold Fusion

Thankfully Nj14 there aren't more people like you.

I would try to explain it to you, but to understand my syntax and diction you need a certain level of intelligence that you obviously do not have.

NEVER sympathize with people like this. The last time someone like this came on a fair number of intelligent people responded compassionately. DO NOT DO THAT, they need to get it into their heads that their ideas are wrong.

I'm not saying his ideas are correct. I'm simply agreeing with him only on the fact that some philosophical issues are truly pointless, such as "what is the meaning of life?" There is no absolute answer or even a few elite answers, so debating it is purely subjective and therefore pointless.

The answer to that is very apparent-life does not have meaning.

Nothing is purely subjective but things that are on a plane of human subjectivity, such as the discussion about 'what is evil'. That discussion was based on human definitions which are intrinsically subjective, yet still even with a discussion like that all that participated improved their minds. When you improve your mind, the world becomes a better place. When enough people do so, things like starvation are eliminated.

Originally Posted by Cold Fusion

The answer to that is very apparent-life does not have meaning.

Nothing is purely subjective but things that are on a plane of human subjectivity, such as the discussion about 'what is evil'. That discussion was based on human definitions which are intrinsically subjective, yet still even with a discussion like that all that participated improved their minds. When you improve your mind, the world becomes a better place. When enough people do so, things like starvation are eliminated.

A lot of concepts are man-made. With over six billion people on this planet and a still growing population, how can we possibly resolve all of our issues?

Yes, that is what I said, all concepts are man made, because....they are concepts.

Yeah, six billion, around 10,000 of which are worth existing.

We are humans....humans create shit like religion and kill each other because of it.

I feel like a single adult among hundreds of thousands of little kids running around causing mayhem and destruction without a clue as to what they are doing. Can you imagine that? Most people would shoot themselves in the head within a day or two; but me, I am resilient and deal with these countless morons day after day.

It's important to question. Philosophy questions and seeks answers through the capacity of thought and argument.

One of the most important things Philosophy teaches you is how the mind can easily fool itself and also how chaotic the mind really is! It constantly contradicts itself influenced by moods!

Through learning to construct arguments and thought experiments one can create stability in the mind and a method of inquiry. It learns to eliminate it's own fallacies.

Philosophy also shows many methods and modes of thought, which when learned, you can easily recognise your mode of thinking and others.

It's a good way to find balance in thinking and eliminate extremes by being aware.

Philosophy is actually thinking about different ways to think.

It's very important in developing a critical faculty.

Thinking exercises such as 'do i exist?' etc should be fun exercises that lead you to clarity about your self and not angst existential nightmares!

Seems like both the OP, and main opponent of, feel a lot of anger at their fellow man. I suggest you both take this funny world more... philosophically. :P

Originally Posted by Nj14

Every time i think of philosophy I cringe. I belive it to be the most time wasting topic.

Consequently I am puzzled that you have initiated a philosophical discussion. Can you resolve the paradox? Without resorting to philosophical methodology?

Yes, what Selene said is true.

Originally Posted by Cold Fusion

Thankfully Nj14 there aren't more people like you.

I would try to explain it to you, but to understand my syntax and diction you need a certain level of intelligence that you obviously do not have.

NEVER sympathize with people like this. The last time someone like this came on a fair number of intelligent people responded compassionately. DO NOT DO THAT, they need to get it into their heads that their ideas are wrong.

You have come to a conclusion that i am of an inferior intelligence based on what appears to be the fact that my theories are not the same as yours.

I think that if you explain your theories to me, you will find that my intelligence in more then ample to understand.


Here is a little wisdom for you Cold Fusion:

Never assume a person has less intelligence than you.

You will soon find yourself at a loss of words and lose intellectual standing with those around you.

Perhaps not me, or the next person you blindy call inferior, but it will happen.

Originally Posted by Ophiolite

Originally Posted by Nj14

Every time i think of philosophy I cringe. I belive it to be the most time wasting topic.

Consequently I am puzzled that you have initiated a philosophical discussion. Can you resolve the paradox? Without resorting to philosophical methodology?

Simply put, no.

I cannot resolve the paradox. I thought about this before i posted. I think that when it really comes down to it, i am a philosopher that hates philosophy.

As much as i hate the inactivity of philosophy, i cant help but be a part of its discussions.

I would not go so far as to directly say inferior.....but if you feel that way about yourself then fine.

Theories? What theories?

Assume? From what I read I am completely justified.

Loss of words....but I have thesaurus.com set as F4!

I've already lost everyones respect after my discussion about the publics satisfaction with stupidity! I really do not care though; I am here because you guys cannot lock me up or try to kill me for what I say. Frankly if it ever gets bad here, I can just delete my account and move on to another forum; in real life you cannot do that.

The lack of the public asking these questions has led to the place that we are in today. Read Plato's The Republic for an idea of how a near perfect society would work.

Originally Posted by Cold Fusion

I would try to explain it to you, but to understand my syntax and diction you need a certain level of intelligence that you obviously do not have.

This statement implies stupidity, a middle school child knows this.

Your theories, why you think philosophy is not a waste of time.
What it does for the human race.

My problem with philosophy is not the questioning, but its seems to me that all the questioning of our world means little if it does not change for good.

Does it really matter what the real truth of what we know or think is real, whent we kill, rape, and burn ourselves as a human race?

Does it really matter why we're here, when we may soon not be?



Dont Patronize me, it does little for you and annoys me.

Originally Posted by Cold Fusion

The answer to that is very apparent-life does not have meaning.

If life has no meaning why are we here?

What does it all mean?



The answer i think is there no clean cut answer

Life is whatever we make of it

Stupidity yes, but not inferiority.

Yes it all matters; even wondering about these things improves your mind.

We are here by mistake. Bacteria happened to form in the oceans and eventually

evolved into us. If anyone cannot understand this, then take an advanced biology class at your local college.

Originally Posted by Cold Fusion

Stupidity yes, but not inferiority.

Yes it all matters; even wondering about these things improves your mind.

We are here by mistake. Bacteria happened to form in the oceans and eventually

evolved into us. If anyone cannot understand this, then take an advanced biology class at your local college.

A inferior intelligence, though.

Many do not belive we are a mistake, i dont.

Hell, maybe you are not dumb, but the last few times someone came on and said something like that they turned out to be utter morons; even without that evidence, I still normally assume stupidity after a statement like that. If you are willing to listen to logic, then I will demote it to ignorance (almost no one here will listen to a good argument if they do not like the implications).

So you believe in a higher power? I will admit that it is very tempting to claim the interference of a higher power, but you have to resist it. Millenniums ago people thought many stupid things because science had not progressed enough yet; right now we are solving more and more about nature-if we do not end ourselves due to religion, and have enough time we will uncover most of the mysteries of the universe that we have conceived so far.

If you are blaming a higher power for our formation, think of yourself as a Mayan thousands of years ago just after he killed a man, and rain followed. Are you really going to believe that by killing people you will get rain? To them at the time their logic was perfect in saying yes, and now you believe that just because humanity has not yet obtained every little detail through science, that it is alright to claim that god made us. If you believe that, you are no different from the Mayans and all others committing intellectual and physical crimes against humanity and nature.

You learn history so that you do not repeat the mistakes of the past; do not make the same mistakes that were made thousands of years ago.

Originally Posted by Nj14

Every time i think of philosophy I cringe. I belive it to be the most time wasting topic.

I seems to me that questions like "why are we here", "what is truth" "what is reality", "what what makes us human", the list goes on, that if ansewered, wouldent really help the world. We are still stuck in this hell-hole with more problems than we can solve.

I hate to be all humanitarian (im not really), but wouldent solving world problems (like starvation and disease) be a better use of time than wondering "why?".




"Why do you stand around agrueing about the existence of gods and the truths of man while your beloved world tears itself apart with hate, anger, ignorance and fear?"

-Yours truely-

You think other human activities such as, for exemple, literature, movies, music, art, sports or scientific research in the field of cosmology or zoology, have any more effect on improvement of our life than philosophy?
You can ask why do we study stars and galaxies when we have bigger problems here on Earth. Or why do we write romances and make movies...
Philosophical questions are naturally in our brain, we don't choose to ask them ourselves. And there are people who like thinking or talking about these matters, even if they know it's not useful, and so they buy philosophical books and pay someone to write them.

i agree that we, as humans, need to ask questions about reality

we need paintings, novels, plays and movies

but what im saying is philosophy always seems to end at the question, and never producing answer

that is why i say that its useless

I suspect that you're criticizing philosophy as a lifestyle: those who consider the day-to-day labor of inconclusive abstract queries to be the focal of their existence - those who are defined by such activity; artist, writers, professors, or any person in general who fallows the trend with top priority. I can understand why this doesn't appeal to you - it doesn't appeal to me either. I was always more of the "get-your-hands-dirty" kinda' guy. Most of the time I take things at face value and quickly move on; seeking only Earthly pleasures. I care little for invisible truths that may or may not be.

However...

The bare essential of philosophy isn't about answers; it's about the process. Many martial artists have slandered the practice of kata; calling it a waste of time and training - that it has no practical use. This is a foolish sentiment. Kata is form - it teaches structure and stresses the benefits of repetition. Philosophy is the intellectual equivalent of this. Think of it as exercising your mind. A healthy amount of philosophy can give one a great deal of cunning in other aspects of critical thought. It also helps in understanding much of human nature that is silly, and therefore gives you the advantage when dealing with men who deem abstract reasoning as the ultimate prowess.

Further more, philosophy is human nature. At one point or another you're going to look up at the stars or out across an open vista, or at your own reflection and wonder just what in the hell is going on. This is fine just as long as you don't let it get the better part of you.

As for philosophy not solving the world's problems ...nothing is going to solve the world's problems. Not philosophy, not science, not politics, not religion ...not anything.

thats what im saying, people are so willing to think about life and such but never do anything to help anybody

Why don't we all sit down in a corner. Do an indian squat. Put your hands on your knees. Index finger touching the tip of your thumb.

Clear our minds of anything..... Then say hummmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm..... for 5 minutes.

Originally Posted by Nj14

Every time i think of philosophy I cringe. I belive it to be the most time wasting topic.

I seems to me that questions like "why are we here", "what is truth" "what is reality", "what what makes us human", the list goes on, that if ansewered, wouldent really help the world. We are still stuck in this hell-hole with more problems than we can solve.

I hate to be all humanitarian (im not really), but wouldent solving world problems (like starvation and disease) be a better use of time than wondering "why?".




"Why do you stand around agrueing about the existence of gods and the truths of man while your beloved world tears itself apart with hate, anger, ignorance and fear?"

-Yours truely-

I think there was a very simple answer to that. Since you do not know yourself how to process rightfully. Philosophy once surely was the only way to store all the information among the society -- to preserve the past, and to ponder about the future. Then the ABC was in invented since philosophy, certainly due to the amount of data and information processed, was not a sufficient medium no more.

: ) This was a little a shot into the blue, I agree. Like a tale I got to myself, but yes, men have been living in urban areas log before anyone ever could have been writing anything down.

All the things which ease our lives are men made. And how to this? A major aspect solely was the organization of it all, which wasn't done as easily as it might be appearing when you're still younger. But, when you stick with what you can do truly, seriously, and even honestly you'll find out about all of this for yourself.

Like, let's say, one can get to a point when it seems to be useful to question the ABC. Like why was A the first letter, B the second? How could you do that? With the help of philosophy, I would say. For what I personally think, therefore I wanted to add something, for the time being the better idea was to exchange thoughts among each other. Debating, discussing things and issues, that's very obsolete.

But the blah blah so to say that we do the hole time was,generally, very helpful. There's nothing else. But how to communicate was the point. I think one has to be doing things like only oneself can do firstly to be a valuable member of the society later on. A community will not gonna be thinking never like only a unique individual can. It's about to get to thoughts first and to share them with others these days, I would say.

I don't wanna put words to your mouth now, but that's were I agree. Philosophy, also debating and discussing issues are obsolete, but not communication between us.

Steve

human ignorance and numbness made philosophy, disscusion and debates pointless

what was done with philosophy in the past is nearly imposible today

it falls on deaf ears

Originally Posted by Nj14

human ignorance and numbness made philosophy, disscusion and debates pointless

what was done with philosophy in the past is nearly imposible today

it falls on deaf ears

So you're not saying philosophy is bad, you're saying philosophers are bad. That's not the same thing. Philosophy is basically the sum of intention of application of the pool of human knowledge for the betterment of whatever the philosopher chooses. Philosophers often tend along with the natural instinct to manifest for the self, i.e. try to gain as much knowledge as possible for themselves with little thought to application for the rest of the world, and even themselves. Self is often neglected for knowledge.

By my philosophy, whats the point of knowledge with no application? Especially for the self. Application makes the difference between a scientific hypothesis and a scientific fact. All theories must be tested for verification/falsification, if, of course, you wanted to do it the scientific way.

How is the philosophy of the past impossible today? Because it falls on deaf ears? The ears of the past were just as deaf. The commonfolk flocked like sheep to whichever man would claim to be their shepherd. The few that recognized true philosophy made it famous, and what did their philosophy preach? Freedom of thought, and getting things done for yourself. The vast majority of the population has always been deaf to these lines of thought, it's nothing new today.

Now that its finally become fashionable to think for yourself, suddenly everyone's a philosopher, and once the same thoughts have been regurgitated thousands upon thousands of times over, we simply shut that shit out.

Originally Posted by ticklemonster

[ suddenly everyone's a philosopher, and once the same thoughts have been regurgitated thousands upon thousands of times over, we simply shut that shit out.

thats just it

its all the same philosophies, people have shut them out, so they do nothing

Originally Posted by Nj14

Originally Posted by ticklemonster

[ suddenly everyone's a philosopher, and once the same thoughts have been regurgitated thousands upon thousands of times over, we simply shut that shit out.

thats just it

its all the same philosophies, people have shut them out, so they do nothing

How ironic that yours is one of those same philosophies.

ya its ironic

NJ14 if its a waste of time to question existence then its a waste of time to try to change existence.

why?

why would it be a waste of time to change it, to make it better?

Originally Posted by Nj14

why?

why would it be a waste of time to change it, to make it better?

Ok, let's change reality and make it better.

Philisophical Question #1: What should we as individuals decide to change?
Philisophical Question #2: Why?
Philisophical Question #3: What is 'better'?
Philisophical Question #4: Where do we draw ethical boundaries?
Philisophical Question #5: What do we do with those who are 'contrary' by nature?
Philisophical Question #6: Who is qualified to answer these questions?
Philisophical Question #7: Why?
Philisophical Question #8: What is God's role in all of this?
Philisophical Question #9: Do we kill babies or do we not kill babies?

Do you need me to go on? Cause it would be easy. I would suggest you learn a proper method of argumentation. When someone relates notions you stand behind to obviously incorrect notions, it doesn't do you well to question the incorrect notion as if it were a serious statement, especially as that notion was used as an example of the problems with your statement because, consequently, you will be questioning your own statement. You knock out the basis on which your initial argument stood, and then knock out the credibility of he who holds the argument. This does not do well for the argument.

If you told me "Dont ask" in regard to a system in place therefore you would not want me to obtain any more information about the "system" and without information how could you change a system ? You couldnt it would be a waste. Without questioning something you cant change anything

If there was no reason to question a system in place then there would be no reason to change it. A problem should always be questioned. If its a waste of time to question, then there's no problem, because if theres a problem its never a waste to ask why ?

If there's no problem in a system then theres no reason to change it. Existence could be plugged in as the "system"

Originally Posted by Ophiolite

Originally Posted by Nj14

Every time i think of philosophy I cringe. I belive it to be the most time wasting topic.

Consequently I am puzzled that you have initiated a philosophical discussion. Can you resolve the paradox? Without resorting to philosophical methodology?

Thus I can quite a agree with Nj14 in the sense that I certainly think that Nj14's sort of philosophy is indeed a complete waste of time.

I haven't read any of the replies here, I'm just responding to the initial post.

Well, I couldn't disagree more. You do make a good point about solving humanity's problems, but I would argue that the greatest problem facing humanity isthe Human Problem. Most of our problems stem from a complete lack of understand about our existence and a sort of violent, desperate scramble to sort it out without taking the time to just sit and think the whole thing over.

We may end up condemning our entire civilization and species to certain death over a lack of understanding about our situation, I think Global Warming is a good example of this. A better one might be how the Dark Ages show what happens when people stop thinking about thinking and start filling their heads with religious rhetoric and political propaganda.

Or if that period in our history isn't enough to persuade you then we can keep talking about solving important problems - we can talk about civil rights; maybe we should of stopped thinking about the problem and just let slavery continue, because who wants to think about whether or not all men are created equal? Or we could talk about governments that kill their own people, like in Darfur because who wants to think about human rights?

Or about how the United States has used paramilitaries throughout history to subdue democratic uprisings in third world countries in order to secure our business interests at the expense of people's lives and standard of living, but who wants to think about these things when we don't have to watch it go down? Or we can talk about our preemptive strike on Iraq, but what international ramifications could that possible have? How would any of these things possibly effect us? It's not like we just gave Iran a legal argument to preemptively strike the United States based on the idea that we might attack them...

The answer of course is that all of these things effect us, because we are constantly shaping our future by what we do now and what we allow each other to do or not do. If we stop thinking about it, and accept the mess in front of us, then we just let the shit hit the fan. And I think there's a lot of that apathy going on today.

As for something less political in nature, we can talk about existentialism, which I think is at the heart of your inquiry. I just can't imagine living without asking these questions, and that's all I really feel like saying about it. If you choose not to, that of course is an option you are welcome to. But I strongly disagree with the notion that it is a waste of time.

Philosophy is rather like the Qabbalistic practice of Gematria, Temurah, Aiq Beker etc

Which is basically manipulating Hebrew words, numbers and holy names to reform new words and numbers and holy names and to dissect words numbers and holy names with the aim of finding hidden meanings, new meanings and holy words and new relationships etc.

At first i shrugged and thought 'what's the point in all that?' 'It's just a silly game isn't it?'
And didn't really bother with it, but when I did start bothering with it, amazing things happened

The most amazing thing I learned was that the point wasn't in the end result at all, the point was actually in the doing.

What it teaches you all this dissecting, recalculating and reforming is to think in different ways. It's purpose is to open up new lines of inquiry and consider possibilities which might have never entered ones head. One of it's most important functions is to demonstrate how everything relates to everything else.

Now I see and use it as a fun exercise for contemplation.

People say the same thing about Philosophy. What's the point?

The point is, it's an exercise for the brain! Like playing chess.

But also Philosophy is about being able to construct arguments as well as being able to identify weak or false arguments.
Good philosophers welcome opposition because if someone can demonstrate an argument to be weak, then surely that might enable us to get a bit more closer to the truth.
Buddhists are masters of Philosophy and they encourage debates and arguments in their teaching, because many hands make light work and often it takes more than just one mind to get nearer to the truth.

Philosophy is about asking questions, the most educational practice in existence.

Originally Posted by 425 Chaotic Requisition

Philosophy is about asking questions, the most educational practice in existence.

Mmmm....yes....but masturbation comes close

So if I beat my bishop while

manipulating Hebrew words, numbers and holy names to reform new words and numbers and holy names...

maybe I'll attain enlightenment?

Well, western philosophy and eastern philosophy have a huge differences.

Western philosophy
a) Define something to a very 'precision'. It define something that if the thing is not precise enough, it will be redefine again. That is major influence that leads western science development.
b) Define something that is observable, if such the thing is not observable proven, is will be thrown away. For example, define love: 'It is interaction of blablabla...' some sort like that.

Eastern philosophy
a) It define something if the thing consider exist, such things can be real or abstract. Mostly it define something that are interactive and the definition stop at the point when no more further interactive observable. If you find out some eastern philosophy keep clarify a definition to a precision, I can tell you that you are reading modern eastern philosophy which mixed with western junk. (I call it a junk not because western idea is junk. The mixed, impure eastern philosophy is a junk, because they like to told us to the point that to let us know 'that they are right', which is a junk)
b) It recording a lot of ideas that without a prove but it is a fact. For example: Love is sex. (You cannot prove it wrong, but it is a fact)

There are a bunch of philosophy ideas, for me it depends on the usefulness or useful-less according to yourself.

Originally Posted by Pong

So if I beat my bishop while

manipulating Hebrew words, numbers and holy names to reform new words and numbers and holy names...

maybe I'll attain enlightenment?

Mmmm......maybe......but enlightenment can come from any quarter. You could gain enlightenment from packing the shopping into the fridge you don't have to practice Qabbalah or religion for that matter to gain enlightenment

Originally Posted by Nj14

why?

why would it be a waste of time to change it, to make it better?

1. Do we have unlimited resources (including time) on our hands?

2. If not, by what criteria do we determine how to use them?

3. Would you stop all use of sugar in your household because it is a luxury you can do without, but allows you to spend more money on helping other starving people?

4. Forget sugar - how about hot running water?

5. New clothes? More than two sets of clothes?

6. Where do you stop and according to what principle do you decide to draw this line?

7. And when you have given all you can give, to whom have you given it: the starving child in southern Sudan, or the starving child in Afghanistan? Why?

Without philosophy to help, not only might we get all the answers wrong, we wouldn't even know enough to ask these questions. Admittedly, some aspects of philosophy can seem pointlessly arcane, but it doesn't preclude philosophy being implicit in every decision we make, not just the moral ones. The point therefore is to be as good as we can regarding this decision-making, and that is what the study of philosophy is about.

Sunshinewarrior, you're a champion. Well reasoned, well said.

Originally Posted by Pong

Sunshinewarrior, you're a champion. Well reasoned, well said.

My blushes

What does knowledge give?

Power!

(But alas it is a double edged sword as are so many advantages, but that's another matter......)

We gain knowledge by experience.

We further the knowledge of those experiences through contemplation.

We compare (as I said it's a double edged sword!) with other experiences and make relations. We gain meaning and understanding of an experience through thinking about it. We analyse. We 'turn things over' in our minds in order to comprehend.
Even the idea or nature of God, and other big ideas!

Philosophy takes this one step further by analysing the thinking process itself.

The trouble with mind, is that it can be an ass!! It tricks and fools us all the time.
As much as we would ideally like to think it doesn't, it does, even more so when we are unaware it is!

Philosophy identifies the pitfalls in thinking which lead to fallacies and illogical thinking which lead us to make errors.

All human misery which isn't caused by nature have, and are being caused by somebody not thinking well!!
And that's a fact!
And that's why philosophy is so important.

There are good and bad ways of thinking. Philosophy helps you understand that and use it.

Philosophy can give you lots of knowledge and power and make life a lot more easier because you are less likely to be biased, prejudiced, duped, misled, conned, brainwashed etc etc, because you can give proper thinking to an issue which will help to make a solution clearer and help you understand a situation better.

Arguments are essential in philosophy. All true philosophers welcome a good argument because if somebody can demonstrate their argument to be unreasonable, then that strips away it's falsity and helps to get closer to the truth.

Philosophy & Critical Thinking should be compulsory in schools.

Perhaps then places like America wouldn't have put up with Bush for so many painful years and Britain would never have entertained Maggie. Ah but we have the future to look forward to.................

Philosophy is of utmost importance!!!

For all the "concrete" answers of science--we still don't know what the hell the universe is!!! And the current Standard Model of Physics isn't as grounded in empirical evidence like it was just a few decades ago.

If anything, now is the time for philosophers to conjure up new, alternative ways of thinking about the universe and how we relate to it!

And for the love of . . . God?--can someone please explain what the hell consciousness is and how it "emerges" from "non-living" matter, because apparently we still don't have a basic explanation for the rise of consciousness and sentiency from the interaction of inamiate matter!

Or could it be that everything is conscious and sentient (including matter and space), just like a few early-twentieth century philosophers and logicians suggested?

I've never met someone who didn't have a philosophy. Philosopher's just focus on refining their philosophy more than others. "The meaning of life" is a one road that some follow, but there are many others.

The poster of this thread used philosophical arguments in an attempt to prove why people are wrong in the things they said; all the while proving the original statement wrong, that philosophy is pointless. The point of philosophy is to correct conceptual errors, refine generalities and organize particulars, not as some would have you believe, to find the meaning of life.

There are many branches of philosophy. Some of which are quite profitable, some are quite empowering, and some are just plain fun, none of them are useless, or we wouldn't have developed the ability to do it.

Originally Posted by Nj14

Every time i think of philosophy I cringe. I belive it to be the most time wasting topic.

I seems to me that questions like "why are we here", "what is truth" "what is reality", "what what makes us human", the list goes on, that if ansewered, wouldent really help the world. We are still stuck in this hell-hole with more problems than we can solve.

I hate to be all humanitarian (im not really), but wouldent solving world problems (like starvation and disease) be a better use of time than wondering "why?".




"Why do you stand around agrueing about the existence of gods and the truths of man while your beloved world tears itself apart with hate, anger, ignorance and fear?"

-Yours truely-

The application of philosophy is the one that shoud be questioned not the validity and value of philosophy. Yes we argue and contemplate nonstop while the world is in trouble but these contemplations can be used in order to further pursue solutions to the plagues. Philosophy can actually be the one of the strongest assests of man, with this law, perceptions, morals, can be debated and forged, yes we have law, morals, percaptionsin place, but with philosophy they can actually be enhanced and perfected even more. Without philosophy to understnd and pursue the very meaning of existence will be pointless, and this vey act of pursuing it can help us understand ourselves. Which matters deeply because I think the reason the world is in trouble is beacuse people do not understand their selves, they partially undestand, this partial can be dangerous.

Originally Posted by sunshinewarrior

Originally Posted by Nj14

why?

why would it be a waste of time to change it, to make it better?

1. Do we have unlimited resources (including time) on our hands?

2. If not, by what criteria do we determine how to use them?

3. Would you stop all use of sugar in your household because it is a luxury you can do without, but allows you to spend more money on helping other starving people?

4. Forget sugar - how about hot running water?

5. New clothes? More than two sets of clothes?

6. Where do you stop and according to what principle do you decide to draw this line?

7. And when you have given all you can give, to whom have you given it: the starving child in southern Sudan, or the starving child in Afghanistan? Why?

Without philosophy to help, not only might we get all the answers wrong, we wouldn't even know enough to ask these questions. Admittedly, some aspects of philosophy can seem pointlessly arcane, but it doesn't preclude philosophy being implicit in every decision we make, not just the moral ones. The point therefore is to be as good as we can regarding this decision-making, and that is what the study of philosophy is about.

AWWW I am now a fan hey hey do you like what I wrote too? do you do you?

"1. Do we have unlimited resources (including time) on our hands?

2. If not, by what criteria do we determine how to use them?

3. Would you stop all use of sugar in your household because it is a luxury you can do without, but allows you to spend more money on helping other starving people?

4. Forget sugar - how about hot running water?

5. New clothes? More than two sets of clothes?

6. Where do you stop and according to what principle do you decide to draw this line?

7. And when you have given all you can give, to whom have you given it: the starving child in southern Sudan, or the starving child in Afghanistan? Why?
"

I don't think this is especially philosophical, because bottom line -- the answer to any of these questions says nothing, except about your opinions(which are ultimately determined by your philosophy and/or neural-chemicals). One can say that philosophy is merely the act of refining opinions, but let me show you what I consider philosophy. Hopefully a better understanding of what it is will allow people to better understand it's usefullness.

before asking "Do we have unlimited resources (including time) on our hands?"
Philosophers would define "we," "unlimited" and "resources." "On our hands" is a figure of speech that means "available" which we should also define.

What makes something a "resource"? The fact that it can be used. What makes somethign usefull? The fact that you have a purpose, and that the resource suits your needs. So before asking whether or not we have resources available, and how much, we need to ask what our purpose is.

about "unlimited:" Everything is limited, but when the limitations don't hinder one's purpose, they are usually overlooked. Thus we must determined purpose before asking if our resources are unlimited.

"We" is the least important part of the question, but it might help to clerify. Do you mean "Me and those in this conversation," or "Me and the rest of the haman race."

and by "Available"(on our hands) do you mean, "within phisical reach" or merely "that we are aware of"

Bottom line, lacking purpose, how can you answer the question?

In knowing your purpose, you can answer number two very easily.

"If not, by what criteria do we determine how to use them?"

By that which will accomplish your purpose must efficiently.

"Would you stop all use of sugar in your household because it is a luxury you can do without, but allows you to spend more money on helping other starving people? "

This is very unphilosophical. Who is to say that sugar is a luxury? It is a good source of calories, and calories are not compeltely uneccisary. It sounds like one of those relative things: the more people who eat too much sugar, the more of a luxury it becomes. We might eat too much of it, but that doesn't make the person who eats very little of it, more decadent than the person who eats none. Sugar is also a pretty cheep source of calories, which may allow you to spend more on charities, but it depends on many factors.

"Forget sugar - how about hot running water?"

Hot running water sometimes(almost always where I'm from) comes from a hot water heater that is used to heat the house. Since it's constantly running in many places during cold months, hot running water costs little to nothing. The gain in time and hygein may allow you to make more money, and thus have more to spend on charities.

"according to what principle do you decide"
I'd wager "one's own" is always aplicable




I think the value in philosophy, is the ability to think clearly, in the face of confused and jumbled thoughts. I've heard that the work of a philosopher is that of "conceptual therapist" that is, someone who helps to repair damaged ideas. To determine what is an undamaged idea is important, and to accomplish that I think we can only see what surtain ideas do to the people who hold them. To do that we must generalize groups of people who have similar lifestyles, and assume that similar actions are inspired by similar thoughts. Philosophy, at it's root, is social criticism, even metaphisics is an attempt to change how others think about thinking.

I did not read very carefully, but no one seems to have stated the obvious.

Philisophy is "pointless" because it has been so eminently successful. Mathematics, Physics, Astronomy, Biology, Chemistry etc have all branched out from their origin to become fields of study in their own right.

Should we then abandon asking questions outside the scope of the branched out sciences?

Originally Posted by samcdkey

I did not read very carefully, but no one seems to have stated the obvious.

Philisophy is "pointless" because it has been so eminently successful. Mathematics, Physics, Astronomy, Biology, Chemistry etc have all branched out from their origin to become fields of study in their own right.

Should we then abandon asking questions outside the scope of the branched out sciences?

To further back this up (with my friendly touch) is the point that is very obvious that without the applied principles of Philosophy which allowed man to express himself in more "enhanced" ways where the formations of higher organized intellectual thought rooted from, proves ever more that Philosophy is indeed the basis of subjects of intelect and without it's evvolution we will probably forever remain in some stone age .
Philosophy= the applied power of human thought

Originally Posted by scientia

Philosophy is indeed the basis of subjects of intelect and without it's evvolution we will probably forever remain in some stone age .
Philosophy= the applied power of human thought

Not all philosophy is a subject of intellect and some of it belongs back in the Stone Age. The wrong philosophy can be forced upon us or blindly accepted.

Originally Posted by marcusclayman

I think the value in philosophy, is the ability to think clearly, in the face of confused and jumbled thoughts. I've heard that the work of a philosopher is that of "conceptual therapist" that is, someone who helps to repair damaged ideas. To determine what is an undamaged idea is important, and to accomplish that I think we can only see what surtain ideas do to the people who hold them. To do that we must generalize groups of people who have similar lifestyles, and assume that similar actions are inspired by similar thoughts. Philosophy, at it's root, is social criticism, even metaphisics is an attempt to change how others think about thinking.

The points you have raised regarding my post are certainly also important points in philosophy. If I didn't express myself clearly enough I apologise.

In Think, Simon Blackburn tries to give three different types of reasons for pursuing philosophy - a sort of low-brow, middle-brow and high-brow.

My point in asking those questions was simply to lead to the sorts of points you have made - without analysis, and since we cannot empirically measure 'morality', only philosophical analysis is left to us, questions and answers of these sorts can get confused. This is a sort of 'middle-brow' approach to the value of philoophy, whereas you appear to be taking the high and handsome line - which is valid too.

Bear in mind that all my questions related to moral aspects of our behaviour because the post to which I responded was about these aspects. I recommend Ayers' Language, Truth and Logic for at least one analysis of how much (or how little) philosophy can do with regard to moral and ethical issues.

Thanks for your post.

Regards

shanks

Originally Posted by scientia

AWWW I am now a fan hey hey do you like what I wrote too? do you do you?

:P

This is quite a good thread all 'round, and yours, and the responses of some of the others, have made it both illuminating and interesting, so thanks.

(This is me sounding condescending or patronising because I also have to half-wear my Moderator hat at all times... 'Pologies)

I've been trying to figure out the simplest way to say what I think on the subject, and here it is. Keep in mind it's not intended to be an ineffable argument, but a rhetorical statement, more less.

The philosophy of philosophy being pointless, is pointless.

All actions are pointless on a long enough time line

Yeah, concidering that a point is something humans consider things to have. When there are no humans, there will also be no points. Animals will nonetheless kill for the point of eating, but there will be no people to objectify this and say "x is the point of z doing y"

who is to say that other things cannot objectify thought... dolphins show metacognition abilities