Confessions: problems with pseudo-philosophers

[PatrickLars]

I have problems with pseudo-philosophers in the net acting like licensed professors. I mean, they’re just trying to intimidate those who don’t have much knowledge to the given subject and what’s worse is they’re making philosophy, the noble field, a confusion among sub-inter disciplinaries and it’s very alarming for me. It is both good and bad at the same time, good because it teaches you to be a critical-minded person, and bad because you spread the wrong thought(if proven likewise). My point is, before you comment about something ‘intelligently sound’ you should first contact or ask an advice from a real practioner. I choose the neutral side most of the time, to the given fact that it is much safer.

“I HAVE LOVED THEE, O BEAUTY, SO ANCIENT, SO NEW”. - St. Augustine.

 

[promethius]

I have problems with pseudo-philosophers in the net acting like licensed professors. I mean, they’re just trying to intimidate those who don’t have much knowledge to the given subject and what’s worse is they’re making philosophy, the noble field, a confusion among sub-inter disciplinaries and it’s very alarming for me. It is both good and bad at the same time, good because it teaches you to be a critical-minded person, and bad because you spread the wrong thought(if proven likewise). My point is, before you comment about something ‘intelligently sound’ you should first contact or ask an advice from a real practioner. I choose the neutral side most of the time, to the given fact that it is much safer.

“I HAVE LOVED THEE, O BEAUTY, SO ANCIENT, SO NEW”. - St. Augustine.

I disagree. Many of the famous philosophers we study now had no more of a degree or qualification in the field of philosophy than many of the posters in this forum. Indeed, if philosophy is an objective science, as it claims to be, then any rational person should be able to follow the logical and precise philosophical method to arrive at various conclusions. They may not have the advantage of common language or of historical knowledge of a situation, but as a science then philosophy should produce repeatable and logical results.

Even if it doesn’t and someone “amateur” ends up disagreeing with an expert… so what? An expertise does not make one right, except insofar as the amateur is wrong because they contradict observable facts. It’s simple fact that many great philosophies have come from debates just such as the ones which rage on in this forum (albiet generally in written… and more permanent… form)

 

[Dameedna]

I don’t mind discussing philosophy with those that know more than me, it’s why I’m here.

And even if I disagree with them, philosophical thinking is the goal and the journey. All anyone can do, is show me I don’t “yet” have a counter argument because I have not thought through mine well enough and haven’t considered theres. No point in a philisophical discussion if there is never an intent to learn.

What is more annoying, is those that do appear to have knowlege, but are unable to explain it in laymans terms at all. And I’m not even talking about complicated topics. In my experience, the individual who truly knows what he’s talking about and has the capacity of a teacher, can teach anyone anything, if they are willing to learn. These people I respect and thankfully there are a few on this forum.

There are many, who quote this and that, and quite frankly I don’t trust any of them.lol!! I get the sneaking suspicion, the more “technical” the language, the less likely the individual is to understand it.

I still don’t think they need to ask a practitioner, but it’s alway’s good to jump in and say “hey, but what about this” if you are an individual who has a great deal of experience in this area. You don’t need to argue, just make a point and leave it.

Hopefully most of us here, even those that have very strong and firm views are here, because they enjoy thinking about these things we discuss.

 

[AndyF]

PatrickLars:

My guess is that few philosophers go to Catholic Answers for a benchmark. There are more serious boards in this topic where that gauge is more reliable. All the same I’m flattered that my (name removed by moderator)ut is seen as a threat, as I know little about it and I’m here to have fun. If it is that threatening then the field needs a better defence mechanism, and I apologize if my material exposes a tear in it’s reputational fabric.

In a religious context, I think Philosophy should have clergy as monitors and to guide us through this topic, but that would be best done by revealing their true occupation and ranking. There are no takers. For some reason remaining clandestine suits them, which I find ironic as the Apostles showed no desire to remain hidden. But that’s OK.

One reason for this could be because of the error they bank on the reception of their contribution to the truth as their obvious credentials. The problem with this is there are few here with the skill to recognize it outright. There are other Catholic boards where some of these learned in the field revealed their credentials and there were no negative side effects. They are usually drawn to becoming mediators and are respected.

There is a need for spiritual guidance here, in keeping with the Apostles advice for guided learning. So this is why I take much in this topic as tongue in cheek. If I had a pressing need for counseling I would go to a spiritual adviser.

I am making some effort to obtain Augustine’s earlier books where I can learn from his failures and how he surmounted obstacles to his maturing Faith. I hope the Cassiciacum dialogues are a good start. I am disappointed that St. Ignatius,s spiritual lessons are still reserved for those who have the time to attend retreats, and am disappointed that his printed works are not available in a condensed format suitable for the modern man in a complex world. Not too many inroads in this area.

Andy

 

[Corki]

I have problems with pseudo-philosophers in the net acting like licensed professors. I mean, they’re just trying to intimidate those who don’t have much knowledge to the given subject and what’s worse is they’re making philosophy, the noble field, a confusion among sub-inter disciplinaries and it’s very alarming for me. It is both good and bad at the same time, good because it teaches you to be a critical-minded person, and bad because you spread the wrong thought(if proven likewise). My point is, before you comment about something ‘intelligently sound’ you should first contact or ask an advice from a real practioner. I choose the neutral side most of the time, to the given fact that it is much safer.

“I HAVE LOVED THEE, O BEAUTY, SO ANCIENT, SO NEW”. - St. Augustine.

I have two questions.

1. Where are professors licensed?
2. What exactly is a “real practioner” of philosophy?

 

[tbcrawford]

Patrick did you mean you were concerned that “well meaning” people could give mis-information to others enquiring about the catholic church?
If so i agree with you.Dont get me wrong i love CAF and i think theres a lot of positives about it.I have learnt,made friends, prayed for people, had people pray for my iontentions and generally felt it a good support network for catholics…HOWEVER…

It does concern me that peoples opinions could be misconstrued for fact by someone enquiring into the faith.Im sure it doesnt happen too often but it is a concern to me.

If thats not what you meant please elaborate for us.Thankyou

God bless

 

[geometer]

I have problems with pseudo-philosophers in the net acting like licensed professors. My point is, before you comment about something ‘intelligently sound’ you should first contact or ask an advice from a real practioner.

Well I have never heard of a philosophers license, where would you get one. And, philosophical practioners, that is an odd turn of phrase. However, I did hear tell of a philosophy professor who began to work as a counselor, as an alternative to psychiatry.

The complaint has been lodged that psychiatrists do not posess any useful knowledge that they can teach. They only know psychology which has not proven to be useful, even in the treatment of mental illness.

So now some philosophers are offering counseling. They propose to teach people who have difficulties, how to think. It seems like a good idea to me…