• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The problem with philosophy

watsup

watsup

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 17, 2020
Messages
47,360
Reaction score
26,058
Location
Springfield MO
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
......is that the practitioners spend centuries discussing it—only to come to the conclusion that there is no conclusion. What’s the point?

“The fundamental problem of philosophy is whether doing it has any point, since if it does not have any point, there is no reason to do it. It is suggested that the intrinsic point of doing philosophy is to establish a rational consensus about what the answers to its main questions are. But it seems that this cannot be accomplished because philosophical arguments are bound to be inconclusive. Still, philosophical research generates an increasing number of finer grained distinctions in terms of which we try to conceptualize reality, and this is a sort of progress. But if, as is likely, our arguments do not suffice to decide between these alternatives, our personalities might slip in to do so. Our philosophy will then express our personality. This could provide philosophy with a point for us. If some of our conclusions have practical import, philosophy could have the further point of giving us something by which we can live.”

The Fundamental Problem of Philosophy: Its Point | Journal of Practical Ethics

The Journal of Practical Ethics is an open access journal in moral and political philosophy (and related areas), published by the Oxford Uehiro Center for Practical Ethics, located at the University of Oxford.
www.jpe.ox.ac.uk www.jpe.ox.ac.uk
 
watsup said:
......is that the practitioners spend centuries discussing it—only to come to the conclusion that there is no conclusion. What’s the point?

“The fundamental problem of philosophy is whether doing it has any point, since if it does not have any point, there is no reason to do it. It is suggested that the intrinsic point of doing philosophy is to establish a rational consensus about what the answers to its main questions are. But it seems that this cannot be accomplished because philosophical arguments are bound to be inconclusive. Still, philosophical research generates an increasing number of finer grained distinctions in terms of which we try to conceptualize reality, and this is a sort of progress. But if, as is likely, our arguments do not suffice to decide between these alternatives, our personalities might slip in to do so. Our philosophy will then express our personality. This could provide philosophy with a point for us. If some of our conclusions have practical import, philosophy could have the further point of giving us something by which we can live.”

The Fundamental Problem of Philosophy: Its Point | Journal of Practical Ethics

The Journal of Practical Ethics is an open access journal in moral and political philosophy (and related areas), published by the Oxford Uehiro Center for Practical Ethics, located at the University of Oxford.
www.jpe.ox.ac.uk www.jpe.ox.ac.uk
Click to expand...
I can't remember the exact question, but in response to a Philosophy class question that asked 'Why' I got a passing grade by answering 'why not'.
 
watsup said:

The problem with philosophy​

Click to expand...
Way easy continue the sentence question.

The problem with philosophy is that its bullshit.


I marvel that they hand out degrees in this and theology. More bullshit.
 
Philosophy isn't one big blob.
 
watsup said:
......is that the practitioners spend centuries discussing it—only to come to the conclusion that there is no conclusion. What’s the point?

“The fundamental problem of philosophy is whether doing it has any point, since if it does not have any point, there is no reason to do it. It is suggested that the intrinsic point of doing philosophy is to establish a rational consensus about what the answers to its main questions are. But it seems that this cannot be accomplished because philosophical arguments are bound to be inconclusive. Still, philosophical research generates an increasing number of finer grained distinctions in terms of which we try to conceptualize reality, and this is a sort of progress. But if, as is likely, our arguments do not suffice to decide between these alternatives, our personalities might slip in to do so. Our philosophy will then express our personality. This could provide philosophy with a point for us. If some of our conclusions have practical import, philosophy could have the further point of giving us something by which we can live.”

The Fundamental Problem of Philosophy: Its Point | Journal of Practical Ethics

The Journal of Practical Ethics is an open access journal in moral and political philosophy (and related areas), published by the Oxford Uehiro Center for Practical Ethics, located at the University of Oxford.
www.jpe.ox.ac.uk www.jpe.ox.ac.uk
Click to expand...
Philosophy is one part role playing and one part debate club. At any rate Philosophy is out dated by science. It served a good purpose centuries a go. But it is pointless now. It is just people's personal opinions.
 
watsup said:
......is that the practitioners spend centuries discussing it—only to come to the conclusion that there is no conclusion. What’s the point?

“The fundamental problem of philosophy is whether doing it has any point, since if it does not have any point, there is no reason to do it. It is suggested that the intrinsic point of doing philosophy is to establish a rational consensus about what the answers to its main questions are. But it seems that this cannot be accomplished because philosophical arguments are bound to be inconclusive. Still, philosophical research generates an increasing number of finer grained distinctions in terms of which we try to conceptualize reality, and this is a sort of progress. But if, as is likely, our arguments do not suffice to decide between these alternatives, our personalities might slip in to do so. Our philosophy will then express our personality. This could provide philosophy with a point for us. If some of our conclusions have practical import, philosophy could have the further point of giving us something by which we can live.”

The Fundamental Problem of Philosophy: Its Point | Journal of Practical Ethics

The Journal of Practical Ethics is an open access journal in moral and political philosophy (and related areas), published by the Oxford Uehiro Center for Practical Ethics, located at the University of Oxford.
www.jpe.ox.ac.uk www.jpe.ox.ac.uk
Click to expand...
If every philosophy faculty in every university in the world had been closed in, say 1900, nothing would be different.

Germany was the philosophy world leader and intensive thinking and the writing of impenetrable tomes by the thousands did nothing to delay or prevent the two worst wars of all time.
 
Lethargic Aptitude said:
Philosophy is one part role playing and one part debate club. At any rate Philosophy is out dated by science. It served a good purpose centuries a go. But it is pointless now. It is just people's personal opinions.
Click to expand...

How do you know that the sky is blue? Using only science, how do you know the sky is blue?
 
watsup said:
......is that the practitioners spend centuries discussing it—only to come to the conclusion that there is no conclusion. What’s the point?

“The fundamental problem of philosophy is whether doing it has any point, since if it does not have any point, there is no reason to do it. It is suggested that the intrinsic point of doing philosophy is to establish a rational consensus about what the answers to its main questions are. But it seems that this cannot be accomplished because philosophical arguments are bound to be inconclusive. Still, philosophical research generates an increasing number of finer grained distinctions in terms of which we try to conceptualize reality, and this is a sort of progress. But if, as is likely, our arguments do not suffice to decide between these alternatives, our personalities might slip in to do so. Our philosophy will then express our personality. This could provide philosophy with a point for us. If some of our conclusions have practical import, philosophy could have the further point of giving us something by which we can live.”

The Fundamental Problem of Philosophy: Its Point | Journal of Practical Ethics

The Journal of Practical Ethics is an open access journal in moral and political philosophy (and related areas), published by the Oxford Uehiro Center for Practical Ethics, located at the University of Oxford.
www.jpe.ox.ac.uk www.jpe.ox.ac.uk
Click to expand...

Philosophy gives us a lens with which to view the world. Everyone has one, a conceptual framework in which they draw conclusions about their experience of the world, and everyone's is different. The argument that every philosophy is different, therefore philosophy is useless is like claiming anatomy is useless because every body is different.
 
spud_meister said:
All of them. How can you have a fact or a conclusion without a framework of what constitutes a fact or conclusion?
Click to expand...
A perfect philosophical statement. Well done! Wide sweeping, all embracing but devoid of any contribution to the advancement of knowledge or human understanding. If you tripped over a kerb stone you would not require philosophical musing to convince you that the bruises were factual.
 
spud_meister said:
Philosophy gives us a lens with which to view the world. Everyone has one, a conceptual framework in which they draw conclusions about their experience of the world, and everyone's is different. The argument that every philosophy is different, therefore philosophy is useless is like claiming anatomy is useless because every body is different.
Click to expand...
Higher sophistry relies to much on false equivalences and metaphores stretched beyond breaking point.
 
There is a philosophical singularity. Golden Rule Ethical Thinking. (GRET)

Just treat others the same way you’d have yourself treated under the same circumstances.

It is the simplest thing and the most common denominator of any other philosophical notion of four play. It is even the basis of articulating how one is justified for doing otherwise if you weren’t met with GRET in others’ dealings with you.
 
Sweden said:
A perfect philosophical statement. Well done! Wide sweeping, all embracing but devoid of any contribution to the advancement of knowledge or human understanding. If you tripped over a kerb stone you would not require philosophical musing to convince you that the bruises were factual.
Click to expand...

Are you ascribing to a materialist philosophy here? That our senses are all that we can know? If you don't bruise, did you still trip?
 
Philosophy is good when the conclusions of a particular set of starting assumptions and the logical/rhetorical algorithm that transforms those assumptions into a conclusion can be observable, repeatable, and measurable to verify the accuracy of that conclusion.

Most philosophy is not useful though and therefore has little value in any practical sense. Engaging in philosophy can be fun though and I studied it quite a bit in my early teens, but realized after a couple of years that it was just a toy and a tool to engage in mental exercise with. People confuse the fact with it being a toy or tool (a means) with having its own intrinsic value (an ends). Its like saying a wrench has value beyond its ability to assist a person in gripping and turning things. Its just a wrench.

The methods of processing information that philosophers have come up with are quite useful in other disciplines, such as social science.
 
Last edited:
The mind/body problem remains a problem, no matter how precise are the instruments of scientific measurement.

And science - itself a philosophical construct - as a methodology has yet to satisfy the problem posed by qualia.

Hence, philosophy.
 
Slartibartfast said:
Philosophy is good when the conclusions of a particular set of starting assumptions and the logical/rhetorical algorithm that transforms those assumptions into a conclusion can be observable, repeatable, and measurable to verify the accuracy of that conclusion.

Most philosophy is not useful though and therefore has little value in any practical sense. Engaging in philosophy can be fun though and I studied it quite a bit in my early teens, but realized after a couple of years that it was just a toy and a tool to engage in mental exercise with. People confuse the fact with it being a toy or tool (a means) with having its own intrinsic value (an ends). I, luckily, did not fall into that trap of perspective.

The methods of processing information that philosophers have come up with are quite useful in other disciplines, such as social science.
Click to expand...
The embedded assumption that use equals value is entirely philosophical.
 
reinaert said:
The embedded assumption that use equals value is entirely philosophical.
Click to expand...
Of course it is and of course people will find emotional and intellectual comfort in pointing that sort of thing out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom