Why should we study philosophy?

1. PHILOSOPHY REPORT
WHY SHOULD WE STUDY PHILOSOPHY?
1

2. PHI 114: Introduction to philosophy
Title WHY SHOULD WE STUDY PHILOSOPHY
Prepared Kaniz Kakon (Lecturer)
for
Group Member
Serial Name ID
01 Jani Molla 09102166
02 Nazmul Huda 09102157
04 MD.Ali Mortuza 09102169
05 MD. Mehdi hasan 09102098
Date: 21 March 2011
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL
2

3. Kaniz Kakon
Faculty,
College of Arts and Science
International University of Business, Agriculture & Technology
4 Embankment Drive Road, Sector- 10,
Dhaka -1230, Bangladesh.
Dated, Dhaka,
March 22, 2011
Dear Madam,
Thank you for giving us such an interesting report on “Why should we study
philosophy ”. This project will help us to know about the philosophy, it’s meaning
and the necessity . There were a lot of concepts which wasn‘t clear to us since it
was hard for us to imagine clearly. By working a lot about this topic will increase
our knowledge power and also our English language power. It will also help us to
know about the related topics including this topic. With our little knowledge of the
subject we tried to make it as interesting and as accurate as possible. The group
compiled very well that is why we had really fun working with each other.
Hopefully you will enjoy reading this project as much as we enjoyed making it.
Thanking you once again.
Group: Authentic
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
3

4. Definitely all praise to Allah. So, first of all, we express my deep gratitude to
almighty Allah who has created and natures us in these transient world. We also
have to put my heartfelt respect and gratitude for the kindness and co-operation
that was provided to us to complete our report on “Why should we study
philosophy”. In preparing our report we have taken great assistance and support
from some persons and Websites. We would like to express our gratitude and
heartfelt thanks to all of them who helped us to get desired information. We
express our sincere gratitude to our teacher Kaniz Kakon, who showed us
flexibility to choose the subject matter of the report and also guided us enough by
providing a thorough outline of the report and preparation. At last we would like
to express our thanks to the authors, article writers and friends who helped us in
every stage of the report by providing valuable information and suggestion in
respect of preparing these report.
Table of Content
4

5. S.l. Content Page no.
1. Title page 1
2. Title fly 2
3. Letter of transmittal 3
4. Acknowledgement 4
5. Introduction 6
6. Background study 7-9
7. Branches of philosophy 9-12
8. Why it is so difficult to define philosophy? 12-13
9. Reason of philosophy 13-15
10. Objectivity (philosophy) 16
11. Objective vs. Subjective in philosophy 17
12. The aim of philosophy 17-19
13. Why is philosophy important? 20
14. Why should we study philosophy? 21-23
15. Conclution 23
INTRODUCTION
5

6. How can we define philosophy? Philosophy could be defined in many different ways. Sometimes
one definition very easily overlaps another definition. In some instances, two different
definitions create a new definition. Using Hegel's terminology, a "new synthesis." Furthermore,
we can say that every definition of philosophy brings meaning and relevance into the human
patrimony. However, we feel we need first of all to understand what is it we mean when we
speak of the word "definition." In its most simplistic meaning, definition is view as the act of
defining, a statement of meaning. Such meaning needs to have relevance to the person who is
receiving the information. Such meaning could contain a set of different layers that would
determine the real significance it's trying to convey. Things such as culture, language spoken or
written, gender roles, prejudices, education, knowledge, personal interests, all of these items, are
the ones that constitute the real meaning of the word definition. Therefore, as one attempts to
define any term in contemporary language, one needs to comprehend the different coatings of
meaning behind any word. At the same time, one needs to take into consideration the changes of
language through time. Language is living phenomena, a phenomenon that is constantly
changing. If we considered this element in the construction of our definition of philosophy, we
will understand that a definition only attempts to bring the student closer to the ultimate meaning
Having this in mind, philosophy could be defined as one's own ideas, attitudes or beliefs about
certain issues. This implies that the way we feel about life, death, sex, marriage, politics, and
religion is philosophy, a philosophy that has gone from the personal belief towards the
communal belief as a society. Any educational institution has a "philosophy of education." A
political party has a specific philosophy dealing with the way a nation should be ruled, "political
philosophy." Even when a young man or woman decides to take a step in relationship to his/her
own sexuality, such an action is the implementation of an individual philosophy about sex; this
in turn has created the American attitude towards sex. A good example would be to look at the
attitude of the Baby Boomer. It is very inetersting to see the generation from the late 60's and
early 70's. Their belief about sex was the foundation for our contemporary attitude towards it. All
of these attitudes we see in common people today, is a direct result of the philosophy our society
has created. Therefore, as we attempt to make an honest analysis of the condition of our culture,
we must take into account the many different ways people "feel" about life.
Without philosophy, without questioning, we would be condemning ourselves to spend the rest
of eternity in the limbo of conformity. Where would we be without Galileo claiming the earth
was round? How far could Christianity have gotten without the revolutionary mind of Martin
Luther? How many individuals could still be considered demon possessed without Pasteur?
Where would the world be without the minds of Nietzsche, Sartre, Kierkegaard or Marx?
Philosophy, therefore, should be studied for the sake of discovering how we arrived at our
present way of thinking. We need to study philosophy if we are serious about understanding the
human condition. Today's world is so diverse; one can get lost in it. However, as we approach
the issues of the world with a clear understanding about where those ideas came from, we can
have a clearer picture of the world we live in today. And, we might also discover what directions
we might seek in the future.
BACKGROUND OF PHILOSOPHY
6

7. Western philosophy:
Western philosophy has a long history, conventionally divided into four large eras - the
Ancient, Medieval, Modern, and Contemporary. The Ancient era runs through the fall of Rome
and includes the Greek philosophers such as Plato and Aristotle. The Medieval period runs until
roughly the late 15th century and the Renaissance. The "Modern" is a word with more varied
use, which includes everything from Post-Medieval through the specific period up to the 20th
century. Contemporary philosophy encompasses the philosophical developments of the 20th
century up to the present day.
Ancient philosophy:
Western Philosophy is generally said to begin in the Greek cities of western Asia Minor
(Ionia) with Thales of Miletus, who was active around 585 B.C. and left us the opaque dictum,
"all is water." His most noted students were Anaximenes of Miletus ("all is air")
and Anaximander (all is apeiron).
Other thinkers and schools appeared throughout Greece over the next couple of centuries.
Among the most important were Heraclitus ("all is fire", all is chaotic and
transitory), Anaxagoras (reality is so ordered that it must be in all respects governed by mind),
the Pluralists and Atomists (the world is composite of innumerable interacting parts),
the Eleatics Parmenides and Zeno (all is One and change is impossible), the Sophists (became
known, perhaps unjustly, for claiming that truth was no more than opinion and for teaching
people to argue fallaciously to prove whatever conclusions they wished). This whole movement
gradually became more concentrated in Athens, which had become the dominant city-state
in Greece.
There is considerable discussion about why Athenian culture encouraged philosophy, but a
popular theory[which?] says that it occurred because Athens had a direct democracy. It is known
from Plato's writings that many sophists maintained schools of debate, were respected members
of society, and were well paid by their students. Orators influenced Athenian history, possibly
even causing its failure (See Battle of Lade). Another theory explains the birth of philosophical
debate in Athens with the presence of a slave labor workforce which performed the necessary
functions that would otherwise have consumed the time of the free male citizenry. Freed from
working in the fields or other manual economic activities, they were able to participate in the
assemblies of Athens and spend long periods in discussions on popular philosophical questions.
Students of Sophists needed to acquire the skills of oration in order to influence the Athenian
Assembly and thereby increase respect and wealth. In response, the subjects and methods of
debate became highly developed by the Sophists.
The key figure in transforming Greek philosophy into a unified and continuous project - the one
still being pursued today - is Socrates, who studied under several Sophists. It is said that
following a visit to the Oracle of Delphi he spent much of his life questioning anyone in Athens
who would engage him, in order to disprove the oracular prophecy that there would be no man
wiser than Socrates. Through these live dialogues, he examined common but critical concepts
that lacked clear or concrete definitions, such as beauty and truth, and the virtues of piety,
wisdom, temperance, courage, and justice. Socrates' awareness of his own ignorance allowed
him to discover his errors as well as the errors of those who claimed knowledge based upon
falsifiable or unclear precepts and beliefs. He wrote nothing, but inspired many disciples,
7

8. including many sons of prominent Athenian citizens (including Plato), which led to his trial and
execution in 399 B.C. on the charge that his philosophy and sophistry were undermining the
youth, piety, and moral fiber of the city. He was offered a chance to flee from his fate but chose
to remain in Athens, abide by his principles, and drink the poison hemlock
Medieval philosophy:
Medieval philosophy was greatly concerned with Christianity, the nature of God and
the application of Aristotle's logic and thought to every area of life. Attempts were made to
reconcile these three things by means of scholasticism. One continuing interest in this time was
to prove the existence of God, through logic alone, if possible. The point of this exercise was not
so much to justify belief in God, since in the view of medieval Christianity this was self-evident,
but to make classical philosophy, with its extra-biblical pagan origins, respectable in a Christian
context.
One early effort was the cosmological argument, conventionally attributed to Thomas Aquinas.
The argument roughly is that everything that exists has a cause. But since there could not be an
infinite chain of causes back into the past, there must have been an uncaused "first cause." This is
God. Aquinas also adapted this argument to prove the goodness of God. Everything has some
goodness, and the cause of each thing is better than the thing caused. Therefore, the first cause is
the best possible thing. Similar arguments were used to prove God's power and uniqueness.
Another important argument for proof of the existence of God was the ontological argument,
advanced by St. Anselm. Basically, it says that God has all possible good features. Existence is
good, and therefore God has it, and therefore exists. This argument has been used in different
forms by philosophers from Descartes forward.
Modern philosophy:
As with many periodizations, there are multiple current usages for the term "Modern
Philosophy" that exist in practice. One usage is to date modern philosophy from the "Age of
Reason", where systematic philosophy became common, excluding Erasmus and Machiavelli as
"modern philosophers". Another is to date it, the way the entire larger modern period is dated,
from the Renaissance. In some usages, "Modern Philosophy" ended in 1800, with the rise of
Hegelianism and Idealism. There is also the lumpers/splitters problem, namely that some works
split philosophy into more periods than others: one author might feel a strong need to
differentiate between "The Age of Reason" or "Early Modern Philosophers" and "The
Enlightenment"; another author might write from the perspective that 1600-1800 is essentially
one continuous evolution, and therefore a single period. Wikipedia's philosophy section therefore
hews more closely to centuries as a means of avoiding long discussions over periods, but it is
important to note the variety of practice that occurs.
A broad overview would then have Erasmus, Francis Bacon, Niccolò Machiavelli, and Galileo
Galilei represent the rise of empiricism and humanism in place of scholastic tradition. 17th-
century philosophy is dominated by the need to organize philosophy on rational, skeptical,
logical and axiomatic grounds, such as the work of René Descartes, Blaise Pascal, and Thomas
Hobbes. This type of philosophy attempts to integrate religious belief into philosophical
frameworks, and, often to combat atheism or other unbeliefs, by adopting the idea of material
reality, and the dualism between spirit and material. The extension, and reaction, against this
would be the monism of George Berkeley(idealism) and Benedict de Spinoza (dual aspect
8

9. theory). It was during this time period that the empiricism was developed as an alternative to
skepticism by John Locke, George Berkeley and others. It should be mentioned that John
Locke, Thomas Hobbes and Edmund Burkedeveloped their well known political philosophies
during this time, as well.
The 18th-century philosophy article deals with the period often called the early part of "The
Enlightenment" in the shorter form of the word, and centers on the rise of systematic empiricism,
following after Sir Isaac Newton's natural philosophy.
Thus Diderot, Voltaire, Rousseau,Montesquieu, Kant and the political philosophies embodied by
and influencing the American Revolution and American Enlightenment are part of The
Enlightenment. Other prominent philosophers of this time period were David Hume and Adam
Smith, who, along with Francis Hutcheson, were also the primary philosophers of the Scottish
Enlightenment and Thomas Paine and Thomas Jefferson who were philosophers of the American
Enlightenment.
The 19th century took the radical notions of self-organization and intrinsic order from Goethe
and Kantian metaphysics, and proceeded to produce a long elaboration on the tension between
systematization and organic development. Foremost was the work of Hegel,
whose Logicand Phenomenology of Spirit produced a "dialectical" framework for ordering of
knowledge. The 19th century would also includeSchopenhauer's negation of the will. As with the
18th century, it would be developments in science that would arise from, and then challenge,
philosophy: most importantly the work of Charles Darwin, which was based on the idea of
organic self-regulation found in philosophers such as Adam Smith, but fundamentally challenged
established conceptions.
Also in the 19th century, the Danish philosopher Søren Kierkegaard took philosophy in a new
direction by focusing less on abstract concepts and more on what it means to be
an existing individual. His work provided impetus for many 20th century philosophical
movements, including existentialism.
BRANCHES OF PHILOSOPHY
I.What is Philosophy?
A.The derivation of the word "philosophy" from the Greek is suggested by the following words
and word-fragments.
 philo—love of, affinity for, liking of
 philander—to engage in love affairs frivolously
 philanthropy—love of mankind in general
 philately—postage stamps hobby
 phile—(as in "anglophile") one having a love for
 philology—having a liking for words
 sophos—wisdom
 sophist—lit. one who loves knowledge
 sophomore—wise and moros—foolish; i.e. one who thinks he knows many things
 sophisticated—one who is knowledgeable
B.A suggested definition for our beginning study is as follows.
Philosophy is the systematic inquiry into the principles and presuppositions of any field of study.
9

10. 1.From a psychological point of view, philosophy is an attitude, an approach, or a calling
to answer or to ask, or even to comment upon certain peculiar problems (i.e., specifically the
kinds of problems usually relegated to the main branches discussed below in Section II).
2.There is, perhaps, no one single sense of the word "philosophy." Eventually many
writers abandon the attempt to define philosophy and, instead, turn to the kinds of things
philosophers do.
3.What is involved in the study of philosophy involves is described by the London
Times in an article dealing with the 20th World Congress of Philosophy: "The great virtue
of philosophy is that it teaches not what to think, but how to think. It is the study of
meaning, of the principles underlying conduct, thought and knowledge. The skills it hones
are the ability to analyse, to question orthodoxies and to express things clearly. However
arcane some philosophical texts may be … the ability to formulate questions and follow
arguments is the essence of education."
II.The Main Branches of Philosophy are divided as to the nature of the questions asked in
each area. The integrity of these divisions cannot be rigidly maintained, for one area
overlaps into the others.
A.Axiology: the study of value; the investigation of its nature, criteria, and metaphysical status.
More often than not, the term "value theory" is used instead of "axiology" in contemporary
discussions even though the term “theory of value” is used with respect to the value or price of
goods and services in economics.
1.Some significant questions in axiology include the following:
a.Nature of value: is value a fulfillment of desire, a pleasure, a preference, a behavioral
disposition, or simply a human interest of some kind?
b.Criteria of value: de gustibus non (est) disputandum(i.e., (“there's no accounting for
tastes”) or do objective standards apply?
c.Status of value: how are values related to (scientific) facts? What ultimate worth, if any,
do human values have?
2.Axiology is usually divided into two main parts.
Ethics: the study of values in human behavior or the study of moral problems: e.g., (1) the
rightness and wrongness of actions, (2) the kinds of things which are good or desirable, and (3)
whether actions are blameworthy or praiseworthy.
i.Consider this example analyzed by J. O. Urmson in his well-known essay, "Saints and
Heroes": "We may imagine a squad of soldiers to be practicing the throwing of live hand
grenades; a grenade slips from the hand of one of them and rolls on the ground near the
squad; one of them sacrifices his life by throwing himself on the grenade and protecting
his comrades with his own body. It is quite unreasonable to suppose that such a man must
10

11. be impelled by the sort of emotion that he might be impelled by if his best friend were in
the squad."
ii.Did the soldier who threw himself on the grenade do the right thing? If he did not
cover the grenade, several soldiers might be injured or be killed. His action probably
saved lives; certainly an action which saves lives is a morally correct action. One might
even be inclined to conclude that saving lives is a duty. But if this were so, wouldn't
each of the soldiers have the moral obligation or duty to save his comrades? Would we
thereby expect each of the soldiers to vie for the opportunity to cover the grenade?
b.Æsthetics: the study of value in the arts or the inquiry into feelings,
judgments, or standards of beauty and related concepts. Philosophy of
art is concerned with judgments of sense, taste, and emotion.
i.E.g., Is art an intellectual or representational activity? What would the realistic
representations in pop art represent? Does art represent sensible objects or ideal objects?
ii.Is artistic value objective? Is it merely coincidental that many
forms in architecture and painting seem to illustrate
mathematical principles? Are there standards of taste?
iii.Is there a clear distinction between art and reality?
B.Epistemology: the study of knowledge. In particular, epistemology is the study of
the nature, scope, and limits of human knowledge.
1.Epistemology investigates the origin, structure, methods, and integrity
of knowledge.
2.Consider the degree of truth of the statement, "The earth is round." Does
its truth depend upon the context in which the statement is uttered? For
example, this statement can be successively more accurately translated as …
 "The earth is spherical"
 "The earth is an oblate spheroid" (i.e., flattened at the poles).
 But what about the Himalayas and the Marianas Trench? Even if we surveyed exactly the
shape of the earth, our process of surveying would alter the surface by the footprints left and
the impressions of the survey stakes and instruments. Hence, the exact shape of the earth
cannot be known. Every rain shower changes the shape.
 (Note here as well the implications for skepticism and relativism: simply because we cannot
exactly describe the exact shape of the earth, the conclusion does not logically follow that the
earth does not have a shape.)
2.Furthermore, consider two well-known problems in epistemology:
a. Russell's Five-Minute-World Hypothesis: Suppose the earth were created five minutes
ago, complete with memory images, history books, records, etc., how could we ever
know of it? As Russell wrote in The Analysis of Mind, "There is no logical
impossibility in the hypothesis that the world sprang into being five minutes ago,
11

12. exactly as it then was, with a population that "remembered" a wholly unreal past.
There is no logically necessary connection between events at different times; therefore
nothing that is happening now or will happen in the future can disprove the hypothesis
that the world began five minutes ago." For example, an omnipotent God could create
the world with all the memories, historical records, and so forth five minutes ago. Any
evidence to the contrary would be evidence created by God five minutes ago.
(Q.v., the Omphalos hypothesis.)
b. Suppose everything in the universe (including all spatial relations) were to expand
uniformly a thousand times larger. How could we ever know it? A moment's thought
reveals that the mass of objects increases by the cube whereas the distance among
them increases linearly. Hence, if such an expansion were possible, changes in the
measurement of gravity and the speed of light would be evident, if, indeed, life would
be possible.
c. Russell's Five-Minute-World Hypothesis is a philosophical problem; the impossibility
of the objects in the universe expanding is a scientific problem since the latter
problem can, in fact, be answered by principles of elementary physics.
B.Ontology or Metaphysics: the study of what is really real. Metaphysics deals with the
so-called first principles of the natural order and "the ultimate generalizations available to
the human intellect." Specifically, ontology seeks to indentify and establish the
relationships between the categories, if any, of the types of existent things.
1.What kinds of things exist? Do only particular things exist or do general things also
exist? How is existence possible? Questions as to identity and change of objects—are you the
same person you were as a baby? as of yesterday? as of a moment ago?
2.How do ideas exist if they have no size, shape, or color? (My idea of the Empire State
Building is quite as "small" or as "large" as my idea of a book. I.e., an idea is not extended
in space.) What is space? What is time?
3.E.g., Consider the truths of mathematics: in what manner do geometric figures exist?
Are points, lines, or planes real or not? Of what are they made?
4.What is spirit? or soul? or matter? space? Are they made up of the same sort of "stuff"?
5.When, if ever, are events necessary? Under what conditions are they possible?
II.Further characteristics of philosophy and examples of philosophical problems are
discussed in the next tutorial.
Why It Is So Difficult To Define Philosophy?
12

13. 1) Philosophy does not have any specific subject matter and hence cannot be defined with regard
to any particular area of investigation. It may deal with every dimension of human life and can
raise questions in any field of study or endeavor (owing to this circumstance we have a variety of
philosophies-of discipline and philosophies-of-subject). Hence trying to tie philosophy
exclusively to one or any specific sphere would be an unjustified limitation of its reach.
2) Philosophy pursues questions rather than answers. The responsibility of philosophy is not so
much to answer our questions as to question given answers. It is not an exaggeration to say that a
philosopher is someone who can make a riddle out of any answer. A true philosopher is not
bound by any particular "truths" that set limits to his/her urge to continue asking questions.
Hence philosophy cannot be defined with recourse to some accepted tenets, beliefs and
established class of propositions.
3) Philosophy changes historically both in respect to its content and its character. Over the
centuries it has assumed very different forms (wisdom, science, art, piety, critique, analysis,
linguistic game, literary genre) and has been practiced in very different settings (market place,
temple, monastery, studio, university, institute, conference, the Internet). The only overriding
notion that could encompass all these manifestations of philosophy is something like "mental
activity", but it is too general to give an informative definition of what philosophy is. Thus we
cannot find a definition of philosophy that would be both essential and sensitive to its historical
variety.
REASON OF PHILOSOPHY:
Most students entering university are unfamiliar with philosophy. Although high school students
are intellectually capable of studying philosophy, they are seldom given the opportunity.
Consequently, the students' impressions about philosophy - impressions widespread in our
society - are often uninformed or misinformed. They may well wonder: "Why should I study
philosophy?"
Here are some possible reasons:
• Philosophy helps us understand that things are not always what they seem. P
• Philosophy helps us learn about ourselves and the world. It teaches us how to grapple
intelligently with basic questions such as:
o "Who am I?"
o "Does God exist?"
o "How should I live?"
o "Should I do what society tells me to do?"
o "Can I be sure of any of my beliefs?
o "Does my life have meaning?
o "Are values just a matter of opinion?"
o "What is the nature of mind, language, and thought?"
13

14. Philosophy makes us more critical. It shows us that what we take for granted may be false --
or only part of the truth.
Philosophy develops our ability
- to reason clearly
- to distinguish between good and bad arguments
- to think and write clearly
- to see the big picture
- to look at different views and opinions.
These skills are highly prized by employers and by graduate / professional schools. They
are never outdated. They enrich our lives and our relationships.
OBJECTIVITY (PHILOSOPHY):
Objectivism" is a term that describes a branch of philosophy us Objectivity that originated in the
early nineteenth century. Gottlob Frege was the first to apply it, when he expounded an
epistemological and metaphysical theory contrary to that of Immanuel Kant. Kant's rationalism
attempted to reconcile the failures he perceived in realism, empiricism, and idealism and to
establish a critical method of approach in the distinction between epistemology and metaphysics.
Ethical subjectivism
The term, "ethical subjectivism," covers two distinct theories in ethics. According to cognitive
versions of ethical subjectivism, the truth of moral statements depends upon people's values,
attitudes, feelings, or beliefs. Some forms of cognitivist ethical subjectivism can be counted as
forms of realism, others are forms of anti-realism. David Hume is a foundational figure for
cognitive ethical subjectivism. On a standard interpretation of his theory, a trait of character
counts as a moral virtue when it evokes a sentiment of approbation in a sympathetic, informed,
and rational human observer. Similarly, Roderick Firth's ideal observer theory held that right acts
are those that an impartial, rational observer would approve of. William James, another ethical
subjectivist, held that an end is good (to or for a person) just in case it is desired by that person
(see also ethical egoism). According to non-cognitive versions of ethical subjectivism, such as
emotivism, prescriptivism, and expressivism, ethical statements cannot be true or false, at all:
rather, they are expressions of personal feelings or commands. For example, on A. J. Ayer's
emotivism, the statement, "Murder is wrong" is equivalent in meaning to the emotive ejaculation,
"Murder, Boo!"
14

15. Ethical objectivism:
According to the ethical objectivist, the truth or falsity of typical moral judgments does not
depend upon the beliefs or feelings of any person or group of persons. This view holds that moral
propositions are analogous to propositions about chemistry, biology, or history: they describe (or
fail to describe) a mind-independent reality. When they describe it accurately, they are true—no
matter what anyone believes, hopes, wishes, or feels. When they fail to describe this mind-
independent moral reality, they are false—no matter what anyone believes, hopes, wishes, or
feels. There are many versions of ethical objectivism, including various religious views of
morality, Platonistic intuitionism, Kantianism, utilitarianism, and certain forms of ethical
egoism and contractualism. Note that Platonists define ethical objectivism in an even more
narrow way, so that it requires the existence of intrinsic value. Consequently, they reject the idea
that contractualists or egoists could be ethical objectivists.
OBJECTIVE VS. SUBJECTIVE IN PHILOSOPHY:
Differentiating Between the Objective and the Subjective: Distinctions between objectivity and
subjectivity lie at the heart of debates and conflicts in philosophy, morality, journalism, science,
and more. Very often "objective" is treated as a vital goal while "subjective" is used as a
criticism. Objective judgments are good; subjective judgments are arbitrary. Objective standards
are good; subjective standards are corrupt. Reality isn't so clean and neat: there are areas where
objectivity is preferable, but other areas where subjectivity is better.
In philosophy, the distinction between objective and subjective normally refers to judgements
and claims which people make. Objective judgements and claims are assumed to be free from
personal considerations, emotional perspectives, etc. Subjective judgements and claims,
however, are assumed to be heavily (if not entirely) influenced by such personal considerations.
Thus, the statement "I am six feet tall" is considered to be objective because such precise
measurement is presumed to be uninfluenced by personal preferences. Moreover, the accuracy of
the measurement can be checked and re-checked by independent observers. In contrast, the
statement "I like tall men" is an entirely subjective judgment because it can be informed solely
by personal preferences - indeed; it is a statement of personal preference
THE AIM OF PHILOSOPHY:
Philosophy does not stay by pure bewilderment and amazement. Philosophers articulate their
initial amazement by formulating questions (mostly what- and why-questions) that guide their
curiosity toward comprehension of the problem. This does not mean that they seek a simple
15

16. formula for all the puzzles of the world (the proverbial "philosophic stone"). Philosophy aims at
understanding and enlightenment rather than shorthand answers. While striving to bring some
light into the complexity of human life and the universe it pursues the old longing for the truth
about the whole. Philosophy is absolutely committed to the truth, "the whole truth and nothing
but the truth". However, the truth of philosophy is never given and complete as we cannot
definitely close out the totality it strives to capture (as Lacan says: I always speak the truth but
only partail). Therefore the search for truth is rather like perpetual striving for more insight than
for the final word on the matters of life and the world. Whenever one is engaged in
philosophizing the chances are that things will become more complex and difficult than before.
Philosophic Questioning
Type of
Asked by Answered by
Questions
Common Sense,
Little Questions All Human Beings.
Everyday Experience.
Scientists, Collecting Data,
Big Questions Experts, Analyzing Facts,
Technocrats. Advancing Hypotheses,
Providing Explanations.
Analyzing Concepts,
Children, Assessing Consistency,
Fundamental
Curious Individuals, Suggesting Alternatives,
Questions Reexamining Framework,
Philosophers.
Evaluating Standards,
Raising New Issues.
Science - Philosophy
Science is the methodical study of the universe in its various aspects (physical, chemical,
biological, social, mental). Science deals with questions that can be decided by experiment and
observation. Consequently, it can attain a "definite body of truths" ("positive results") at least in
some domains. Says Russell: "If you ask a mathematician, a mineralogist, a historian or any
other man of learning what definite body of truths has been ascertained by his science, his
answer will last as long as you are willing to listen." Wherever science is effective, it achieves
not only "well defined" but accurate and valid knowledge as well. Scientific knowledge advances
by accumulation constantly superseding its previous historical stages. Scientific language is
univocal and its propositions have unambiguous reference.
However, science has its limits. It cannot tell us what is beautiful, good or just, what is the
16

17. meaning of life, and what we can hope for. Science does not provide evaluative and interpretive
knowledge. Moreover, science does not include full knowledge about itself. As Russell points
out, the sciences cannot attain the unity of scientific knowledge by themselves. For that purpose
they need to turn into a meta-study, which surpasses their methods and competence and leads to
philosophy.
Art – Philosophy
Art is a very diverse phenomenon which resists any simple and exhaustive definition. Like
philosophy, the concept of art is also an open one both historically and in terms of its possible
current applications. Hence, different definitions only stress different dimensions of art: formal
signification, emotional expressiveness, intuitive character, meaningful organization of
interrelated parts, etc. We are on the safe ground if we say that art is a creative activity aimed at
producing objects of appreciation. No matter what is its form or content, art is oriented more
toward subjective expression of views, unconscious desires, and emotions than toward
argumentation, cognition or transmission of information. It emits powerful messages but the
language of art is more visual, acoustic, metaphorical, allusive and therefore more ambiguous
than the language of philosophy.
What is the Value of Philosophy?
Why it is necessary to consider the question of value with regard to philosophical thinking?
Simply put, because its value is not self-evident. On the contrary, philosophy is under suspicion
of being not only practically useless but of being deprived of any value. We have admitted that
philosophy is not useful in producing tangible, immediate results. It is so helpless that it cannot
even pull a dog out of its house (Hegel). The fact is that philosophical questions do not bring
income, do not fix broken gadgets, and do not help us attract the person we may like. But they
are not worthless for that matter. They satisfy intellectual and spiritual needs (the "needs of the
mind"). They achieve their value indirectly, through their effect "upon the lives of those who
study" philosophy.
WHY IS PHILOSOPHY IMPORTANT?
Why should anyone, including atheists, care about philosophy? Many think of philosophy as an
idle, academic pursuit, never amounting to anything of practical value. If you look at the works
of ancient Greek philosophers, they were asking the same questions which philosophers ask
today. Doesn't this mean that philosophy never gets anywhere and never accomplishes anything?
Aren't atheists wasting their time by studying philosophy and philosophical reasoning?
Certainly not — philosophy is not simply something for egghead academics in ivory towers. On
the contrary, all humans engage in philosophy in one form or another because we are
philosophizing creatures. Philosophy is about gaining a better understanding of ourselves and our
17

18. world — and since that is what humans naturally desire, humans quite readily engage in
philosophical speculation and questioning.
What this means is that the study of philosophy is not a useless, dead-end pursuit. It is true that
remaining with philosophy does not afford an especially wide range of career options, but skill
with philosophy is something which can be readily transferred to a wide variety of fields, not to
mention things we do every day. Anything which requires careful thinking, systematic reasoning,
and an ability to ask and address difficult questions will benefit from a background in
philosophy.
Obviously, this makes philosophy is important for those who desire to learn more about
themselves and about life — especially irreligious atheists who cannot simply accept the ready-
made "answers" typically provided by theistic religions. As Simon Blackburn stated in an
address he delivered at the University of North Carolina:
People who have cut their teeth on philosophical problems of rationality, knowledge, perception,
free will and other minds are well placed to think better about problems of evidence, decision
making, responsibility and ethics that life throws up.
These are some of the benefits which irreligious atheists, and just about anyone else, can derive
from studying philosophy:
Problem Solving Skills: Philosophy is about asking difficult questions and developing answers
which can be reasonably and rationally defended against hard, skeptical questioning. Irreligious
atheists need to learn how to analyze concepts, definitions and arguments in a way conducive
towards developing solutions for particular problems. If an atheist is good at this, they can have
greater assurance that their beliefs may be reasonable, consistent and well-founded because they
have examined them systematically and carefully.
Communication Skills: A person who excels at communicating in the field of philosophy can
also excel at communication in other areas. When debating religion and theism, atheist need to
express their ideas clearly and precisely, both in speaking and in writing. Far too many problems
in debates about religion and theism can be traced to imprecise terminology, unclear concepts,
and other issues that would be overcome if people were better at communicating what they are
thinking.
Self-Knowledge: It isn't just a matter of better communication with others that is helped by the
study of philosophy — understanding yourself is improved. The very nature of philosophy is
such that you get a better picture of what you yourself believe simply through working through
those beliefs in a careful and systematic fashion. Why are you an atheist? What do you really
think about religion? What do you have to offer in place of religion? These aren't always easy
questions to answer, but the more you know about yourself, the easier it will be.
18

19. Persuasive Skills: The reason for developing problem solving and communication skills is not
simply to gain a better understanding of the world, but also to get others to agree with that
understanding. Good persuasive skills are thus important in the field of philosophy because a
person needs to defend her own views and to offer insightful critiques of the views of others. It is
obvious that irreligious atheists seek to persuade others that religion and theism are irrational,
unfounded, and perhaps even dangerous, but how can they accomplish this if they lack the skill
for communicating and explaining their positions?
Remember, everyone already has some sort of philosophy and already "does" philosophy when
they think about and address issues which are fundamental to questions about life, meaning,
society and morality. Thus, the question is not really "Who cares about doing philosophy," but
rather "Who cares about doing philosophy well?" Studying philosophy isn't simply about
learning how to ask and answer these questions, but about how to do it in a systematic, careful,
and reasoned manner — exactly what irreligious atheists say isn't typically done by religious
believers when it comes to their own religious beliefs.
Everyone who cares about whether or not their thinking reasonable, well-founded, well-
developed and coherent should care about doing this well. Irreligious atheists who are critical of
the way believers approach their religion are being at least a little bit hypocritical if they
themselves don't approach their own thinking in an appropriately disciplined and reasoned
manner. These are qualities which the study of philosophy can bring to a person's questioning
and curiosity, and that is why the subject is so important. We may never arrive at any final
answers, but in many ways it is the journey which is most important, not the destination.
WHY SHOULD WE STUDY PHILOSOPHY?
Most students entering university are unfamiliar with philosophy. Although high school students
are intellectually capable of studying philosophy, they are seldom given the opportunity.
Consequently, the students' impressions about philosophy - impressions widespread in our
society - are often uninformed or misinformed. They may well wonder: "Why should I study
philosophy?"
Here are some possible reasons:
• Philosophy helps us understand that things are not
always what they seem. P
• Philosophy helps us learn about ourselves and the
world. It teaches us how to grapple intelligently with
basic questions such as:
o "Who am I?"
o "Does God exist?"
o "How should I live?"
o "Should I do what society tells me to do?"
o "Can I be sure of any of my beliefs?
o "Does my life have meaning?
19

20. o "Are values just a matter of opinion?"
o "What is the nature of mind, language, and
thought?"
Philosophy makes us more critical. It shows us that what we take for granted may be false --
or only part of the truth.
Philosophy develops our ability
- to reason clearly
- to distinguish between good and bad arguments
- to think and write clearly
- to see the big picture
- to look at different views and opinions.
These skills are highly prized by employers and by graduate / professional schools. They are
never outdated. They enrich our lives and our relationships.
By studying the writings of great philosophers we see the extent to which philosophy has
influenced science, religion, government, education and art.
Philosophy empowers us to critically examine ours views and the views of others.
Occasionally this leads us to reject our "inherited" views; however, it should always give us new
and creative ways to deal with problems we could not otherwise solve.
We all have a certain attitude towards life, we all have different hypotheses regarding Flying
Spaghetti Monsters, and we all have a standard by which we measure good and evil. The only
difference, as Rand says, is “whether you define your philosophy by a conscious, rational,
disciplined process of thought…or let your subconscious accumulate a junk heap of unwarranted
conclusions.”
CONCLUTION
The study of philosophy serves to develop intellectual abilities important for life as a whole,
beyond the knowledge and skills required for any particular profession. Properly pursued, it
enhances analytical, critical and interpretive capacities that are applicable to any subject-matter,
and in any human context. It cultivates the capacities and appetite for self-expression and
reflection, for exchange and debate of ideas, for life-long learning, and for dealing with problems
for which there are no easy answers. It also helps to prepare one for the tasks of citizenship.
Participation in political and community affairs today is all too often insufficiently informed,
manipulable and vulnerable to demagoguery. A good philosophical education enhances the
capacity to participate responsibly and intelligently in public life. In short, the study of
philosophy increases one’s intellectual powers, and as a result it improves one’s chances of
20

21. staying afloat in the high and often choppy seas of human action and human thought. Philosophy
is a superb undergraduate major. Far more people ought to consider it seriously.
THE END
21