• Philosophy and Spirituality
    Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Threads of Note Socialize
  • P&S Moderators: JackARoe | Cheshire_Kat

What is the point of studying Western Philosphy?

I like to think of philosophy, not as something with many practical applications, but as a specialised interest. I used to believe it was more useful, but my opinions have changed. My father is a philosophy lecturer, and I think on many occasions the guy just thinks too much, and has taught me to do the same!
 
yeah, we were talking about this in a literature class today - although i would criticize those courses for killing the spirit of the stories - that philosophers tend to run around in circles. since you're tracing everthing with your perception, it will inevitably lead back to the subject- you...so philosophy tends to be kind of fruitless. i think it was useful as a prototype of science in ancient times, but science, which is also far from perfect, has picked up where it left off (of course they reall both 'mean' the same thing, literally speaking)
 
Firstly, 'post-modernism' is a bastard of a term that I think has long outlived its utility. One could argue it borders on being meaningless at worst and vague at best. Philosophical thought isn't nearly as homogeneous as it is commonly assumed to be. (Not specifically referring to anyone here btw)

One of my majors is philosophy, but I am also a student of spirituality. I have never been able to conceive of a way to strictly demarcate the two, indeed they often seem to be aiming for the same end with different means. Additionally, several philosophers peppered their corpus with what most would consider spiritual thought and style (Nietzsche comes to mind).

Consequently I don't see your point at all--it seems to me that if one discards philosophy they would have to do the same with spirituality. I don't even want to start constructing anything like a rigorous argument for this topic, but I can earnestly suggest you read and think more on the subject with an open mind.

I will agree with you wholeheartedly that Kant and Derrida can't write for shit though. Speaking of not being able to write for shit, I apologize for my hackneyed post. It is late and I am on drugs. =D
 
ControlDenied said:
yeah, we were talking about this in a literature class today - although i would criticize those courses for killing the spirit of the stories - that philosophers tend to run around in circles. since you're tracing everthing with your perception, it will inevitably lead back to the subject- you...so philosophy tends to be kind of fruitless. i think it was useful as a prototype of science in ancient times, but science, which is also far from perfect, has picked up where it left off (of course they reall both 'mean' the same thing, literally speaking)
Click to expand...

Philosophy is only fruitless if you restrict it to the quest for objective truth (Which unless you're name happens to be Bertrand you probably don't want to do.)

Science is akin to the genitalia of philosophy. Heck, you can't even really talk about science without breaking into philosophy. Nor can you interpret scientific knowledge in human terms etc. etc.
 
fair enough. i personally love philosophizing. even without weed - but i feel like the body/rage/passion just rips all that thinking to shreds and makes it so sadly meaningless. im not really sure what philosophy does for me except learn to expect things from my life that cannot exist.
 
^ people change things change people change things...
-- written around the wooden perimeter of a men's bathroom mirror in college.
 
I'm not even sure anymore that I exist in the same world as some of the above posters! How could you come to your conclusions!? :D

No offense but most of you sound wildly off the mark as to what professional analytic philosophers do :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top