In recent memory, I can only think of one magazine that I have consistently read cover-to-cover: Adbusters. It is simultaneously interesting, challenging, informative, and counter-cultural. It’s given me plenty of food for thought, although I am far from agreeing with all of their opinions. A quick critique: There is a difference between rebelling against everything and rebelling for something.
Anyway, I was reading this very same magazine and encountered a very interesting article written by a philosophy student at some prestigious university. His thoughts reflected many of my own. Philosophy, as a school of thought, is dying.
He focused primarily on the fact that philosophy is currently a school that is more historical than inspirational. Students are simply taught how to regurgitate ideas and opinions espoused by previous philosophers … not develop anything new. I’m not saying that students should not learn the incredible history of these intellectual giants, but rather that they should then learn how to think for themselves. They should use their historical knowledge, stand on the shoulders of those giants, and continue to apply philosophy to life.
Aside from only being able to repeat the progress of others, I would like to point out that the subsequent consequence of this trend in the philosophical school is to create a study that has no relation to reality at all. When philosophy becomes so cumbersome or contradictory to be completely inapplicable to our daily life, it becomes a form of mental jumping-jacks. There is a lot of effort, but no real movement in any direction.
Having taken a few philosophy oriented classes, I’ve also come the conclusion that the school of philosophy is in deep existential trouble. I absolutely believe that students should learn philosophy. They should also learn, however, how to think and speak on what they personally believe … not what other thinkers have already said. Respect for the history of thought has never meant abandoning our own thinking.
Word.
On a similar topic: http://www.paulgraham.com/philosophy.html
Thanks Josh. Frankly, I like the criteria of “applicability.” I have to think if that is sufficient in and of itself, but it seems like a necessary direction in the realm of philosophy at this point.
Spoken like a true LDer my friend.
Ben
This explains why philosophy exhausts my brain … it is merely mental jumping jacks! … but then again, I am afraid of heights so would not want to stand on anyone’s shoulders either! I am in a philosophical quandary!
I have to disagree. You’ve “taken a few philosophy oriented classes;” I have a BA in the damn subject! There is no death.
I agree with you on some level: I do believe that the classics are a little outdated, but they are still completely necessary to read and digest. Aristotle was a scientist. Socrates was a bum. Plato was a short-story writer. It’s boring to plow through “an ox is an ox because it has the qualities that make it an ox; a man is a man…” or even “the forms, the forms, the forms!” But these are the foundations, the Boethian “bedrock,” of philosophical study. It is IMPOSSIBLE to read Jacques Derrida (d. 2004) without having an understanding of Plato.
Recent metaphysical dilemmas are dealing with concepts like time travel and fourth dimensionalism. Just because you have to read through dialogues and ancient texts in undergraduate classes doesn’t mean that philosophy is dead (you’d be more correct if you were talking about the humanities being dead; lots of schools are cutting humanities classes out of their curriculum because they are not “sexy” like business or marketing, or whatever.)
If and when you go on to take doctoral classes on the subject — you’re not expected to regurgitate what the masters have said, but develop your own ideas, theories, philosophies, whatever.
And your professors are terrible if they’re making you repeat what you read. Blame them, not philosophy.
Daniel,
Thanks for commenting. I am claiming, not so much that philosophy is a dying study like the humanities you mention, but that philosophy is dying when it ceases to be relevant, applicable, or understandable. Life is philosophical, but so often the study of philosophy seems to miss its connection to life. I guess I just have a hard time understanding why time-travel has any bearing on my life.
If I was to condense the point of my post into a call for action, it would be that people should, as you said, “develop your own ideas, theories, philosophies, whatever.” I do not, however, believe that the process of critical examination and creation should begin on a doctoral level.
I am admittedly no expert, but the point is that you shouldn’t have to be an expert in order to understand and communicate in the philosophical realm.
I agree, you don’t have to be an expert to wax philosophy, or come up with theories. But what worth do they have if they’re not supported, published, argued, defended by an expert in the field? Are you going to trust a regular person or a food critic on a restaurant? And like your Mom said, the mental jumping-jacks are exhausting for those who aren’t able to commit themselves and endure it. Try thinking about time travel, or God’s existence — any normal person will go insane. Kant, a certified weirdo but one of the masters, had the same routine, day-in and day-out, and never broke it.
You may have put words in my mouth — I tried to imply that in undergraduate studies, you’re a told to read and regurgitate. I know, I went through it myself. That’s all I did. But, when you get to such a level of study (i.e. Masters and Doctorate), you are own to make your own conclusions and theories. By then, you are considered an expert and have the right to explain, lecture, publish, argue, defend, etc.
Otherwise, really, everything else is just romancing the stone.
Philosophy will never cease to be anything BUT relevant. You might as well call science or history irrelevant, while you’re at it. Ethical issues are constantly debated about in philosophic ways; hell, the whole basis of the court room is structured on philosophical debates (the way in which they are conducted).
Hey Matt,
Absolutely true. Couldn’t agree with you more.
I esteem myself as a Philosopher… so if miffs me when people refer to Philosophy as “The History Of” rather than the important principles of logical development.
But hey ;) why would a growing entity of power want to teach people to think? Having sheep to clone yourself onto pays the bills :P.
Hey, Daniel, I think quite thoroughly about time travel and God’s existence, you call’n me weirdo? ;)
“learn how to think”….. ah Matt, I am still in the process. :)
Well said Matt, in particular your critique of the disconnect between life as we know it and, shall we say, modern philosophic thought. Some of what Daniel says is interesting, and it is true that I have limited exposure to philosophy, similar to you. It is of concern to me that he seems to suggest that ideas should not be developed and expressed unless you are an expert… then you can have an opinion. Perhaps this is part of the disconnect.