The Importance of Philosophy

Post Reply New Topic

Introduction: The Importance of Philosophy
Both Locke and More reduced and marginalized philosophy to something of a profession to solve the little quirks in everyday life which are not too profound; leading to the conclusion that philosophy is useless, as at its core it is to think profoundly in order to solve or better understand issues. This very notion makes philosophy useless as it restricts its scope: it essentially turns a philosopher into a doctor for society, prescribing medications, when a philosopher used to be the scientist making the medicine for the problem, while also identifying it: A philosopher used to find the problem, and attempt to solve it with rational, reflective thought.

However, in today’s liberal world, thanks to Locke, he is now a mere tool of the market, enhancing the individuals interest by solving “every day” issues instead of attacking the underlying issues which cause them. This “control” over the philosopher is a safeguard for liberalism, as without it, the political philosopher would attempt to solve the bigger issue that is liberalism; the anti-political, self interested, community corrupting ideology that it is.

This goes for any age, though liberalism is the issue needing solved today; philosophy is useful in that it is always attacking the status quo, offering a small window of knowledge showing what could possibly be better in alluding to what is currently wrong. With it being restricted to ever day issues, its value is destroyed and it becomes utterly useless.

This essay will shed light on the issues that self-interest poses, as well as other issues in today’s political universe, of which are furthered by tyrannical self-interest.

I see nothing wrong with philosophy.

What I get irritated about is when somebody absolutely adheres to one particular philosophy.

I believe the "truth" can be arrived at through a composite of all ideas which have been promulgated throughout history.

I have realized since writing this that it sounds like I am attacking philosophy, as I never really say why it is useful. However I do stand by the fact that it is very useful, which is why I am sarcastic towards Locke in this introduction, as he marginalized it.

Are you writing for a general audience? I don't recall having learned anything about More, and I've forgotten what little I read of Locke, so you lost me at the beginning.

Okay, I am addressing the issue of the common reader. I am elaborating the ideas in the main paper in a "Clarifications" section which gives quotes and references, as well as more elaboration of general ideas. Thanks for the input.

Cato, how about Foucalt?

Thank for starting this thread on the importance of philosophy, Cato Publius. Could you clarify which aspects of the ideology of liberalism you consider especially pernicious? The term is used in a number of different contexts with a number of different meanings.

I thought that Locke himself was a philosopher? It seems paradoxical to attack the very basis from which he could reason to reach the conclusion to attack philosophy in the first place.

It is good to be reminded that this forum is not for religion and politics alone, but also philosophy.

It doesn't have to be an either/or thing. Philosophy is scalable.

Back in the day (the classical period), philosophy was used as a tool by individuals, showing them how to live a good life. As you might be able to tell from my avatar, I'm quite interested in Roman Stoicism.

This philosophy is definitely concerned with the "modest concerns" of everyday life, but Stoics were also obliged to do public service and the philosophy definitely informed how they went about it.

I think a bigger threat to philosophy and the way it is perceived today has to do with how abstract and extreme it can become. Often it amounts to so much mental masturbation, and many folks discount it because they don't see it as relevant to their daily lives.