Philosophers literally invented formal logic to help them answer questions. Yes they are trying to answer questions and constrain the possible answer space where they can’t.
Philosophers literally invented formal logic to help them answer questions. Yes they are trying to answer questions and constrain the possible answer space where they can’t.
Carrolade@lemmy.world 4 months ago
Certainly, but that was before the scientific method rose to prominence. Things change, and that can include the purpose of any given practice.
masterspace@lemmy.ca 4 months ago
Sure, but at a fundamental level philosophers are still seeking new understanding and information which is a form of answering questions.
They’re not just sitting there asking questions with no purpose.
Carrolade@lemmy.world 4 months ago
Asking a question can have many purposes asides simply answering it. I think if a philosopher thinks they are definitively answering important questions, they’re perhaps engaging in a bit of hubris, and while that may have been more appropriate in earlier centuries, I doubt very many in the modern day fall into that kind of self-important trap.
Coming up with hypothesis and working out the brain with new methods and ideas is important in other ways, you simply don’t need that sort of certainty that belongs more in the arena of faith. Call them “answers” or whatever, that’s fine. The purpose is not to arrive or convince, though, it’s to strengthen through exercise and come up with new things. Much like how martial arts is no longer as useful for self defence in a world with handguns, but instead makes for very good exercise and social connections, and is just fun.
Not that philosophy cannot answer any questions, mind you. But I don’t think that’s very important anymore when more rigorous methods exist. Finding answers is a very small thing philosophy can accomplish, that is minor and unimportant compared to the much more valuable things it can do for a person’s skillset. If it did not contribute to skillsets in a very efficient way, I doubt it would have much relevance anymore.
masterspace@lemmy.ca 4 months ago
Except that a key difference is that no one gives out PhDs for martial arts. Yes you can get a black belt, signalling that you are as skilled as the top tier martial artists (I assume, I don’t do martial arts), but you cannot write a peer reviewed paper and get a PhD on karate because that would require learning something new about it and publishing it.
Philosophy in how the common person relates to it, may just be as a mental kata that helps to improve their lives, but philosophy as a profession and academic discipline is still very much concerned with trying to answer questions and find ways of constraining the infinite to relevant possible answers.