Philosophy

Battery Acid:

I THINK THAT THESE DAYS PEOPLE DON'T JUST ACCEPT SIMPLE ANSWERS AND FOLLOW RULES AS WELL AS THEY USED TO......BUT I HAVE BEEN TRYING TO FORM MY OWN OPINIONS AND THEORIES MY WHOLE LIFE....

That's not exactly what philosophy is, or at least not the way I learned it. Philosophy to me, is questioning everything, not necessarily because you disagree with something, but just become more knowledgeable. Also to me it means to think in a way that is based on logic and reason. The word philosophy came from ancient Greece, and originally meant love of knowledge or love or wisdom.

Quote

CAUGHT UP WITH THE MOMENT

But there are philosophies that say to live in the moment.

Info on famous philosophers(from wikipedia, but it seems to match up with what I know is true):

Socrates: Perhaps his most important contribution to Western thought is his dialectic method of inquiry, known as the Socratic Method or method of '"elenchus," which he largely applied to the examination of key moral concepts such as the Good and Justice. It was first described by Plato in the Socratic Dialogues. To solve a problem, it would be broken down into a series of questions, the answers to which gradually distill the answer you seek.

If anything in general can be said about the philosophical beliefs of Socrates, it is that he was morally, intellectually, and politically at odds with his fellow Athenians. When he is on trial for heresy and corrupting the minds of the youth of Athens, he uses his method of elenchos to demonstrate to the jurors that their moral values are wrong-headed. He tells them they are concerned with their families, careers, and political responsibilities when they ought to be worried about the "welfare of their souls." Socrates' belief in the immortality of the soul, and his conviction that the gods had singled him out as a divine emissary seemed to provoke, if not ridicule, at least annoyance.

Many of the beliefs traditionally attributed to the historical Socrates have been characterized as "paradoxal" because they seem to conflict with common sense. The following are among the so-called Socratic Paradoxes:
No one desires evil.
No one errs or does wrong willingly/knowingly.
Virtue - all virtue - is knowledge.
Virtue is sufficient for happiness.

Socrates often said his wisdom was limited to an awareness of his own ignorance. Socrates believed wrongdoing was a consequence of ignorance and those who did wrong knew no better.
Socrates believed the best way for people to live was to focus on self-development rather than the pursuit of material wealth.
It is often argued that Socrates believed "ideals belong in a world only the wise man can understand",[citation needed] making the philosopher the only type of person suitable to govern others. In Plato's dialogue the Republic, Socrates was in no way subtle about his particular beliefs on government. He openly objected to the democracy that ran Athens during his adult life. It was not only Athenian democracy: Socrates objected to any form of government that did not conform to his ideal of a perfect republic led by philosophers, and Athenian government was far from that. It is, however, possible that the Socrates of Plato's Republic is colored by Plato's own views.

Plato: Plato is very similar to Socrates.
The Theory of Forms typically refers to Plato's belief that the material world as it seems to us is not the real world, but only a shadow of the real world. This is most often illustrated in the cave allegory:

Imagine prisoners who have been chained since their childhood deep inside a cave: not only are their arms and legs unmovable because of chains; their heads are chained in one direction as well so that their gaze is fixed on a wall.
Behind the prisoners is an enormous fire, and between the fire and the prisoners is a raised walkway, along which puppets of various animals, plants, and other things are moved. The puppets cast shadows on the wall, and the prisoners watch these shadows. Behind this cave there is a well-used road, and upon this road people are walking and talking and generally making noise. The prisoners, then, believe that these noises are coming directly from the shadows they are watching pass by on the cave wall.
The prisoners engage in what appears to us to be a game: naming the shapes as they come by. This, however, is the only reality that they know, even though they are seeing merely shadows of objects. They are thus conditioned to judge the quality of one another by their skill in quickly naming the shapes and dislike those who play poorly.
Suppose a prisoner's chains break, and he is able to get up and walk about (a process which takes some time, as he has never done it before). Eventually he will be compelled to explore; he walks up and out of the cave, whereby he is instantly blinded by the sun. He turns then to the shadows on the floor, in the lakes, slowly working his way out of his deluded mind, and he is eventually able to glimpse the sun. In time, he would learn to see it as the object that provides the seasons and the courses of the year, presides over all things in the visible region, and is in some way the cause of all these things that he has seen.
Once enlightened, so to speak, the freed prisoner would not want to return to the cave to free his fellow prisoners, but would be compelled to do so. Another problem lies in the other prisoners not wanting to be freed: descending back into the cave would require that the freed prisoner's eyes adjust again, and for a time, he would be one of the ones identifying shapes on the wall. His eyes would be swamped by the darkness, and would take time to become acclimated. He might stumble, Plato asserts, and the prisoners would conclude that his experience had ruined him. He would not be able to identify the shapes on the wall as well as the other prisoners, making it seem as if his being taken to the surface completely ruined his eyesight.

According to Plato, a state which is made up of different kinds of souls, will overall decline from an aristocracy (rule by the best) to a timocracy (rule by the honorable), then to an oligarchy (rule by the few), then to a democracy (rule by the people), and finally to tyranny (rule by one person, rule by a tyrant)

This post is getting way to lengthy, so on Aristotle I'll just say that I like him way more than Socrates or Plato. I hate the form of government that Plato insists is perfect. (even though he tried that in a country and it failed) I think Aristotle's golden mean is perfect. Of course there are more famous philosophers, Nietzsche, John Locke, and [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean-Jacques_Rousseau]Jean-Jacques Rousseau to name a few. This is so freaking long, I'll be surprised if anybody reads all of it.

Eponine:

Quote

CAUGHT UP WITH THE MOMENT

But there are philosophies that say to live in the moment.

No, you've taken that way out of context. All I was saying is that there are plenty of people who are perpetually distracted from or ignorant to these matters, and that it isn't exclusive to our youth.
I didn't suggest that there was anything wrong with living in the moment. I guess I just couldn't think of the right words.

Oh okay, I understand that. I was a bit confused by all of it.

i personally think philosophy should be taught in schools, maybe as one text to study in english or comparing two different philosophers' text's in english. It would really help people into a different mindset rather than their former ignorance to think that way. It leads peope to think outside the box and investigate everything rather than just roaming through life ignorant and having no path. Thats not to say that having no particular path is bad, i dont have any aspirations, but i think people should try to gain a better understanding of their surroundings before they try to tackle life and all the responsibility it holds, it culd help them in some of their biggest decisions.
Opening people up to philosophy early will let them take a different thinking pattern, because now most young people do not even have a desire to think this way, they would rather think how media tells them to think than think on their own. But they do not know this because it is merely influence by the media that makes them all think alike, [hilosophy allows people to think on their own and tihnk on a differnt level to what they did before.
The younger generation is definately desensitsed to this way of thinking as today i tried to explain a simple philosophical idea to them as simply as i could and they could not comprehend it, because they have had 15 years of thinking in a way that does not need this side of thoughts. The earlier people are shown this way of thinking the better.

Yes, I quite agree. ^

I took a philosophy class last year. (It was actually Critical Thinking, but most of it was philosophy) If your school offer humanities courses then you can take a class on it. Many schools might not offer it because it's not a necessary skill, for those who don't go to college. And if you do go to college well then, you'll get it there.

B'den:

The way it is taught is also like any other subject based on fact. Teachers really don't want your [i]opinions[i] (as my teacher made it painfully clear) they want the facts, thus you have to apply one theory to the other and back your arguments this way.

Well in the real world if you can't back up what you say with facts no one cares. And philosophy isn't based on facts it's based on thinking.

Quote

Personally I didn't find philosophy benefactory to me, I already have my views on the world and evolution vs. creation.

There's more to philosophy than that. Most of the most famous philosophers didn't give a rat's ass about religion.
As far as being beneficial to you, the world, and your life, would be very different if not for philosophy and philosophers.

^ As in facts I meant using other philosophical theories to base an argument on, that you have to know the theories and not go off down the deep end into emotivism.

And to me 'my views' is based on my thinking, you have to think to have a view and evolution vs. creation was an example. As for it being beneficial to me I meant this as in I study the subject and a number of philosophers (from Plato and Aristotle to more modern thinkers Fraud, De carte, Peter Vardy ect) over a year and it still didn't move my formed opinions on religion as I did take Religious Philosophy and ethics. The books we studied were based on Religion through Philosophy (The thinkers guide to God / Evil)

Quote

There's more to philosophy than that. Most of the most famous philosophers didn't give a rat's ass about religion.

What about Plato's Demiurge and Aristotle's Prime mover (who did not consciously create the universe yet lead to causing it)? They were all trying to form some idea on how we came into being and what was the first cause. Plato and Aristotle both came to the conclusion that there was a greater being out side of time and space, what religious people would called God and the world of forms some might be bold and say that is heaven.

B'den:

What about Plato's Demiurge and Aristotle's Prime mover (who did not consciously create the universe yet lead to causing it)? They were all trying to form some idea on how we came into being and what was the first cause. Plato and Aristotle both came to the conclusion that there was a greater being out side of time and space, what religious people would called God and the world of forms some might be bold and say that is heaven.

I'm not as well educated as you on the religious aspect of it but still those are two out of many, and their most famous ideas aren't about religion. Of course there are religious philosophies, but they are not the only thing, and I wouldn't say that they are the main aspect.

ignore

i'm currently taking philosophy as a module in college. and it's pretty interesting. but i still don't understand what the hell is philosophy about.

plato's one majorly important philosopher, but his stuff is weird. a lot of his teachings were through the mouth of socrates, and we can never be sure if the things he wanted to teach were the beliefs of socrates, or his own ones.

and definitely, philosophy does not equal to religion. socrates (or plato?) argued about holiness and topics like that, and socrates was once summoned to the agora for 'creating his own gods'.