It is a very good question. Today we are going to discuss the philosophy of well... philosophy. To understand the ontological meaning of philosophy we must first look at the philosopher themselves. People who engage in philosophy are doing so to solve some sort of problem. They are applying a means (their brain) to solve a problem (discovery of some truth). However, what is this truth they are trying to discover? The axiom above is true simply because human beings act to achieve an end all the time. I am doing this very thing right now. Right now I am trying to peer into the mysteries of man’s mind to discover what truth he is searching for.
But let us leave the Telos of philosophy and focus on how one philosophizes. The act of philosophy is to apply a means to achieve an end to figure something out. I want to make sure that I am right, therefore, I wish to discover what is true and be able to discern what is true from what is false.
Now of course the truth I am trying to discover is not a total truth of all things. I am not interested in facts that have no bearing to my cause. I do not care what the tallest building in the world is or who is the strongest man. I only care to discover more about philosophy.
Now this means that there are two categories that must be discovered, personal and universal truth. Personal truths are those truths that interest the individual. That Sombra is a hacker can only interest those people who want to play a game like Overwatch. The mating habit of flies may seem rather boring to the average joe but is of infinite interest to the scientist. Philosophy must then not be a matter that only pertains to the few, but to all men who are trying to employ means to achieve some end. This means that philosophy must have a universal applicability. But why?
A thing like science is only of interest to a scientist, but the fact that he is a person who is trying to use means to achieve an end....... means that he is employing the same rational factualities as other people trying to do their own thing. This means that one of the goals of philosophy is trying to figure out how people figure things out. I suppose this is where logic, cosmology, ontology, and epistemology come into play. It is merely an interplay of taking something apart to figure out what it is and then putting it back together to see how it works and then applying it to solve some personal end. However, is there more to philosophy? What if people have the same ends in that they are people?
In one case we can see that if all people are trying to achieve some end by some means, then we can also say that all people can benefit from understanding philosophy’s more actionable items. Rather than using it to simply learn what some famous philosopher said, they can apply that saying to solve some problem and learn to keep applying it to meet various circumstances. However, is philosophy nothing more than a toolbox? Is there more to a common end for humanity other than being a creature trying to solve problems? What happens to this creature once all his problems are solved? Is he then useless? What is a man when he has no problems but is merely content with his life? Will philosophy still be useful?
It would be absurd to state that man is in a constant cycle of means and ends as if their ends never leave them in a state of contentment. I suppose one goal of philosophy is to go beyond the end and figure out what it means to fulfill one’s ends. What is a person who fulfill’s his ends? What does he do?
Let’s say I decide to answer this question from experience or analogy. When I finish eating my food, I no longer want food once the problem is solved. Once I play Overwatch, however, a single victory does not mean that I do not wish to play another round. I seem to find a sense of enjoyment is solving problems that are purely intellectual. When I watch a movie or t.v show, I also seem interested in seeing how people try to solve their problems and I feel a sense of enjoyment in that as well.
This seems to be interesting as we can now separate problem solving into two categories, the necessity and the entertaining. The necessity is one that keeps us alive. It is a need in the sense that not having it means survival will cease. Meanwhile, entertainment is one where I am interested in solving problems or at least watching other people solve problems. It could be that problem solving is in our very nature; it is the essence of what it means to be human.
Okay this thing is acting up every time I type. I am stopping here for today.
No comments:
Post a Comment