practicality of philosophy today

[ScylaX]

Re: practicality of philosophy today

I took an ancient philosophy course this semester and I learned a ton. Philosophy is more practical today than it has ever been particularly because almost everybody cannot think on their own. It really seems that today people are treated as means to an end rather than as rational agents. People used to attend university purely for the betterment of the soul, and I think no one would agree with that today. I recommend reading Plato and Aristotle.

I'm not okay on your recommendations about Plato and I'd prefer people reading Nietzsche instead (Aristotle will be forever a medication h4h), and I hope, reading him while actually understanding him. Bourdieu and Ayn Rand are good to read too, to stay in that context of individual emancipation.

And to comment the rest of your post : I couldn't agree more and I love you.

[Reincarnate]

Re: practicality of philosophy today

but what is important is what led you to assert something like that, and thus, what will helps you develop - probably - a whole theory from what led you to say that.

http://www.users.qwest.net/~jcosta3/article_dragon.htm

[iCeCuBEz v2]

Re: practicality of philosophy today

yes you can. that's the point of philosophy

lol

[intensez]

Re: practicality of philosophy today

i love philosophy

as regards to what it can be used for though i think for the most part it answers questions science can't

i wrote a paper on immanuel kant. now that guy is really really interesting, from his stance on the morality of situations to his thoughts on the purpose of human life

[Arkuski]

Re: practicality of philosophy today

i love philosophy

as regards to what it can be used for though i think for the most part it answers questions science can't

i wrote a paper on immanuel kant. now that guy is really really interesting, from his stance on the morality of situations to his thoughts on the purpose of human life

I absolutely loved Kant's stance on morality. Also, if you like a religious spin on things, St. Thomas Aquinas is pretty good.

[Cavernio]

Re: practicality of philosophy today

dunno science taught me to not take things at face value

Are you sure it was science that taught you that?

IMO people seem to credit science with anything and everything these days while it seems they know very little science about what they're crediting, calling general knowledge science, assuming that unless that knowledge is founded in something very specifically unscientific (like religion), it therefore must be founded in science. People seem also to use the term scientific when they mean logical. Science is logical yes, but not necessarily the opposite.
Or maybe its just me giving the term science a much smaller definition than what most people give it. If that's the case then I think most people just don't 'get' the full idea of science and how rigorous it needs to be, because it is most unscientific to call something not rooted firmly in science, science.

As far as the usefulness of philosophy, the ability to interpret and understand scientific results is necessarily bound in philosophy. The understanding of how our interpretation of data influences what we deem as the truth from science is incredibly important.

Overall though, I do agree with the OP that philosophy has branched or evolved into more specific areas (sciences, social sciences), and that those specific fields are what have become more useful and worthy of further study. (It's why, personally, I can't believe in non-deity religions that are founded in philosophy...we just know too much for me to be content with pondering how I am the negative that is surrounded by positive and other such ideas.) But it's a pretty tall order to say that philosophy has become useless however; in order for that to be the case we'd have to have philosophized so much that we understand all the recesses of our minds fully.

[Reincarnate]

Re: practicality of philosophy today

Science is ultimately a framework that appeals to empiricism/reason. You can have things that aren't "scientific" that still fall within the realm of empirical analysis.

My own personal view is that if your philosophical framework finds itself straying too far from such areas, you're going to be appealing to an inferior model.