Why philosophize?

[Charlemagne_III]

Why do we bother to philosophize when the history of philosophy is an endless trail of logical contradictions that leave us hopelessly without a conclusion that all can subscribe to?

Your thoughts?

 

[Tim_D]

You have a greatly mistaken notion of philosophy.

Theology is a branch of natural philosophy. Do you maintain that theology "is an endless trail of logical contradictions that leave us hopelessly without a conclusion that all can subscribe to?"

If what you say is true, then where does that leave the Church and the deposit of faith?

 

[meltzerboy]

Why do we bother to philosophize when the history of philosophy is an endless trail of logical contradictions that leave us hopelessly without a conclusion that all can subscribe to?

Your thoughts?

I believe that through studying earlier and contemporary philosophers, we can gain a means of clear and critical thinking that may help us in our everyday lives. It is not only the theoretical end result of philosophers’ questioning and ideas that is important but the means they use to arrive at their philosophical theories.

 

[Ben_Shipman]

Philosophical tenets that move beyond dispute may be absorbed into science. Philosophers should get credit for those, not only the questions that have remained insoluble.

 

[GEddie]

I think the OP and I are on the same page.

When people like Plato and Nietzsche, both generally considered “philosophers,” can reach such diametrically opposed positions, the usefulness of what we now call “philosophy” is called into question, and should be.

These days, anybody who claims to have new ideas about life can call himself a “philosopher” and possibly even gain a hearing.

But that is not what philosophy originally meant, but a rigid, precise system of thought. Such a system is needed to pursue knowledge in any field.

ICXC NIKA

 

[Charlemagne_III]

Why do we bother to philosophize when the history of philosophy is an endless trail of logical contradictions that leave us hopelessly without a conclusion that all can subscribe to?

Your thoughts?

By the way, my opening question was rhetorical.

I did not mean to imply that I am against philosophy. What I ask is a reply to those who find philosophy to be a useless pursuit. There are many who do. But that fact will not stop philosophers from doing what they like to do. I think philosophy is important, but I think it is a two edged sword. It can be used to find truth, or it can be used to advance error, which it often has done given its track record.

Think Marx and Nietzsche, for just two modern examples; going back in time, Hobbes and Hume.

 

[Rhubarb]

Philosophy discusses topics that science can’t touch. There are things like truth, beauty, identity, etc. that no amount of empirical inquiry can touch on. At least not yet. When it can, the subject generally becomes a science. Until science gets its paws on them, these other subjects need to be explored as best we can.

 

[inocente]

There’s a difference between loving philosophy, and only loving philosophers we happen to agree with.

I think the value of philosophy is in seeing how philosophers systematically reach their differing conclusions. For instance even though there are many conflicting theories of ethics, and they give differing answers to moral questions, learning about them gives us new ways to think. We can contrast the various approaches in any particular case and that can help us make better decisions. They each have value, even those we might not like.

 

[Charlemagne_III]

Where philosophy invariably goes wrong is when it places a priority upon reason to the extent of denying the power of faith to arrive at the truths about God that we are all entitled to know. When philosophy (and God knows plenty of philosophers) attack religion as superstition, we know reason has been called into the service of the devil, and has accepted the call.

 

[BrunoMaria]

Philosophy is an indispensable part of Christianity. He who doesn’t think himself deeper into the truth of Christ - which is Philosophy and to philosophize, will never come and reach to the absolute conclusions belief provides.
Take Aurelius Augustinus (*354 †430) as if you like first Philosopher of Christianity (I’d rather think St. Paul was the first Christian Philosopher). He spoke of continuous dialogue with God.
Take one of the newer Christian Philosophers; Edith Stein. She founded the „Science of the Cross“. Pope John-Paul II declared her 1998 a Saint.
Without philosophic thinking, which is given to the least humans same as to anyone, (even is first one just owns a limited way of expressing things) we will never grasp the full truth of the Christian treasure of Christ’s truth, which actualyl is open to anyone - if illiterate of highly educated.
God’s gift of being able to think is Philosophy, for we never think in simple terms, but in very individually winding paths - each of us to his ability. And don’t be surprised, when sometimes a child speaks out a highly philosophical sentence.

Yours
Bruno

 

[Charlemagne_III]

Yes, philosophy is a vital part of Christianity.

However, one could survive and prosper with faith alone, which philosophy is powerless to provide. Faith is assent to that which Reason can only glimpse but cannot fully understand, especially when Reason is separated or separates itself from the longings of the heart.

Natural theology (a branch of philosophy) has brought most of humanity to one reasonable religious conviction or another. In that sense philosophy is useful and enlightening. Where I have found Reason most useful, however, is for the purpose of exposing the logical fallacies of those who repudiate religion for their own private or public reasons.

I believe that Reason, which prides itself on proof, often is used by those who hate religion to fight religion, but those who fight religion never seem to realize that the same logic they use against religion can be used against irreligion.

 

[ynotzap]

Philosophy is natural to man. When humans seek knowledge they become philosophers, it is the achievement of wisdom so far as the human mind can grasp it. The quality of knowledge is important in gaining a deeper understanding of reality and philosophy deals with these qualities. It covers all fields of knowledge, not just some. Even a child asks “Why?” The desire to know truth is in man’s nature, to know it by the use of man’s reason. It is coupled with Faith, in that it can be shown that faith is reasonable and not in opposition to it or natural science, it can lead to a deeper understanding of faith, and science.

 

[belorg]

Philosophy is natural to man. When humans seek knowledge they become philosophers, it is the achievement of wisdom so far as the human mind can grasp it. The quality of knowledge is important in gaining a deeper understanding of reality and philosophy deals with these qualities. It covers all fields of knowledge, not just some. Even a child asks “Why?” The desire to know truth is in man’s nature, to know it by the use of man’s reason. It is coupled with Faith, in that it can be shown that faith is reasonable and not in opposition to it or natural science, it can lead to a deeper understanding of faith, and science.

True philosophy should be able to reasonably question every aspect of reality, including faith.
To use faith as a condition for philosphy and at the same time use philosophy to show faith is reasonable seems question-begging to me;

 

[Charlemagne_III]

True philosophy should be able to reasonably question every aspect of reality, including faith.
To use faith as a condition for philosphy and at the same time use philosophy to show faith is reasonable seems question-begging to me;

Even the skeptic has to have faith in his own philosophy if he is a true skeptic.

 

[BrunoMaria]

True philosophy should be able to reasonably question every aspect of reality, including faith.
To use faith as a condition for philosophy and at the same time use philosophy to show faith is reasonable seems question-begging to me;

Thanks for this disclosure of atheist conviction. That’s a typical atheist way of thinking; twisting all realities and stating the result as absolute truth
Let me clarify, that faith was never a condition for philosophy. The greatest philosophers of the ancient world e.g. in the antique Greece where pagans and didn’t mix up the philosophy of all scientific subjects with their polytheism. All scientific subjects where mere philosophy, before they became tangible, general discipline all recognized as true.
In our time, philosophy is not showed to show faith. Quite contrary those who recognized faith as the absolute truth, use philosophy to help them getting deeper into Christ’s doctrine.
But I old this often some atheists, and had to learn, that atheists refuse to open themselves for other than freethinker’s convictions - as freethinkers are free of thinking and therefore avoid to bother about anything else but their doctrine THERE IS NO GOD and all there is, evolved out of itself with no Creator who started.

If you dare to hear some arguments versus freethinkers convictions, then listen to this for a brave start:
catholiceducation.org/en/controversy/answering-atheists/god-or-atheism-which-is-more-rational.html
congratulations if you do

Yours
Bruno

 

[belorg]

Thanks for this disclosure of atheist conviction. That’s a typical atheist way of thinking; twisting all realities and stating the result as absolute truth
Let me clarify, that faith was never a condition for philosophy. The greatest philosophers of the ancient world e.g. in the antique Greece where pagans and didn’t mix up the philosophy of all scientific subjects with their polytheism. All scientific subjects where mere philosophy, before they became tangible, general discipline all recognized as true.
In our time, philosophy is not showed to show faith. Quite contrary those who recognized faith as the absolute truth, use philosophy to help them getting deeper into Christ’s doctrine.
But I old this often some atheists, and had to learn, that atheists refuse to open themselves for other than freethinker’s convictions - as freethinkers are free of thinking and therefore avoid to bother about anything else but their doctrine THERE IS NO GOD and all there is, evolved out of itself with no Creator who started.

If you dare to hear some arguments versus freethinkers convictions, then listen to this for a brave start:
catholiceducation.org/en/controversy/answering-atheists/god-or-atheism-which-is-more-rational.html
congratulations if you do

Yours
Bruno

Are you sure you were replying to me? Because nothing you say here has anything to do with what I wrote.

 

[fisherman_carl]

Why philosophize? The correct answer is to discover truth. If we could never know the truth then you would be right, it would be a waste of time. However, it is analogous to doing science. Why do science? Do not also scientists make theories and then test those theories? And, do not often those theories become proven wrong or at least have to be modified? So if a theory is proven wrong then does that mean science is useless? Of course not. That is part of the process. It is part of our nature to search for truth and understanding. So if a theory or a philosophy is proven wrong then we look for another that better explains the data. In order to do this you must believe there is truth and that it can be known if we seek for it. If you don’t believe that then you won’t bother to look.

 

[Charlemagne_III]

Why philosophize? The correct answer is to discover truth. If we could never know the truth then you would be right, it would be a waste of time. However, it is analogous to doing science. Why do science? Do not also scientists make theories and then test those theories? And, do not often those theories become proven wrong or at least have to be modified? So if a theory is proven wrong then does that mean science is useless? Of course not. That is part of the process. It is part of our nature to search for truth and understanding. So if a theory or a philosophy is proven wrong then we look for another that better explains the data. In order to do this you must believe there is truth and that it can be known if we seek for it. If you don’t believe that then you won’t bother to look.

Good.

Since Reason is the primary instrument of philosophy for achieving the truth, what we must hope for is that it is honestly used to demonstrate that religious principles are not just supra-rational, but also rational. What we have to guard against is those who use Reason to prove things that cannot be proven, such as that there is no God, no soul, no immortality, no objective Good or Truth. This can be done, but only if Reason is rightly applied to serve the higher truths by finding them to be logically consistent and plausible, certainly more consistent and plausible than atheism allows.

 

[ynotzap]

True philosophy should be able to reasonably question every aspect of reality, including faith.
To use faith as a condition for philosphy and at the same time use philosophy to show faith is reasonable seems question-begging to me;

A clarification must be made, to show having faith is reasonable is one thing, to show that everything in faith can be acquired by reason is another thing. eg. Christian Faith is claimed to be acquired by Divine Revelation. Some of it’s tenants can be acquired by reason: eg. St.Paul to the Romans 19-20 “…His invisible attributes of eternal power and divinity have been able to be understood and perceived in what He has made-what is known about God is evident…” St,Thomas Aquinas set out to prove this by reason, using metaphysical truths acquired by reason in his cosmological arguments- using the principles of cause and effect, and demonstrating these principles through five classical proofs, motion, order, necessity, grades of beings, and origin. He synthesized reason with faith.
As you said, philosophy questions every aspect of reality, including faith. We have to discern the limits of reason when it comes to faith. Faith is not a condition for philosophy, but truth is, by philosophy we try and do acquire as much as we can by the use of our reason Faith is reasonable, but it goes beyond reason.

 

[Charlemagne_III]

Faith is reasonable, but it goes beyond reason.

Chesterton emphasized that one of the eminent intellectual virtues prized by the Catholic Church through its teachings is common sense. Common sense is founded upon right reason that is recognized everywhere as right reason. This is another aspect of philosophy that applies to religion. A religion that does not prize and practice common sense is a religion that is automatically demoted down the roster of religions to choose from.