Is philosophy dependent on humanity?

Forums: Philosophy, Humanity, Meaningfulness
Email this Topic • Print this Page

'Philosophy is dependent on humanity.' Discuss...
I'd like to put this forward as a topic for discussion as it can be interpreted in many different ways, and hopefully it'll get some good ideas in response. E.g., are philosophy and the capacities of both reasoning and thought within it transcendent concepts or are they things that are invented by/only make sense if there are human beings to use them?
Also, are the ideas encountered in philosophy only worthwhile if we use them in terms of human constructs? For example, if we removed war from the world today for all time, would ethical ideas concerning it such as Just War theory be rendered totally meaningless?
Please feel free to interpret the statement for discussion above in any way - I've tried to make it as ambiguous as I can (although maybe that's not too helpful:/...)
Phil

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Discussion • Score: 8 • Views: 2,070 • Replies: 33

[+4] - contrex - 08/14/2014[quote="Romeo Fabulini"] But if war was removed, wouldn't people of future generations say "War? What's that? Never heard of it!" I mean, how could people discuss something...

But if war was removed, wouldn't people of future generations say "War? What's that? Never heard of it!"
I mean, how could people discuss something that no longer exists?

3 Replies

@PhilipOSopher,

PhilipOSopher wrote:

are philosophy and the capacities of both reasoning and thought within it transcendent concepts or are they things that are invented by/only make sense if there are human beings to use them?

I'm not sure of what you're asking here, but to respond in one way, philosophy and reasoning are purely human traits, as far as I'm aware. I don't know of other species that reason or reason philosophically.

PhilipOSopher wrote:

Also, are the ideas encountered in philosophy only worthwhile if we use them in terms of human constructs? For example, if we removed war from the world today for all time, would ethical ideas concerning it such as Just War theory be rendered totally meaningless?

Yeah, I think ideas about it would be moot; they'd be in the realm of hypothesis.

1 Reply

@Romeo Fabulini,

Romeo Fabulini wrote:

But if war was removed, wouldn't people of future generations say "War? What's that? Never heard of it!"
I mean, how could people discuss something that no longer exists?

Well, we do have discussions about dinosaurs, for example.

0 Replies

@InfraBlue,

Quote:

I'm not sure…..philosophy and reasoning are purely human traits….. I don't know of other species that reason…...

Blue, the trouble with Phil's q and possibly your response is that they are dualistic or digital in an analog world

Nothing is entirely anything while everything is partly something else. Thus the most ignorant humanoid reasons and philosophizes just as the very intelligent professor; to some extent so do cat and dog, the flea, the bacterium; the atom; the neutron

2 Replies

@PhilipOSopher,

the subject is subjected to his or her awareness and perception of any object stimuli situation or particular thing or group of things for that matter.

the problem arises what is beyond my thinking awarness about a thing, what is a thing a being an entity in it's absloute form of reality.

the problem arises for you what do you want out of this encounter?
and how shall i give it to you?
and how shall you attain it?

basic teachings..
all is empty
behind your thoughts their is emptyness
behind your wants their is craving, behind craving their is a stimuli for power not in the obvious sense of the word. behind that their is emptyness
behind your doing their is desire. in front of desire their is fruitlessness, fruitlessness is emptyness.

...... more?

0 Replies

@Romeo Fabulini,

Romeo Fabulini wrote:

But if war was removed, wouldn't people of future generations say "War? What's that? Never heard of it!"
I mean, how could people discuss something that no longer exists?

That is an amazingly stupid thing to write.

2 Replies

@contrex,

sorry. please what is bothering you dear?

0 Replies

@dalehileman,

So by implication (although I may have made a leap from what you've said), we could say philosophy is the all-encompassing term for reasoning or the use of a logical thought process by something rather than strictly in the sense of the transcendent formulation/analysis of ideas? The distinction potentially being between philosophy as reason as a capacity or philos as reason as the collective 'ideas' that this capacity accesses?
Phil (www.philosophersblogofideas.blog.com)

1 Reply

@PhilipOSopher,

philosophy goes beyond mear reasoning powers.

0 Replies

@Romeo Fabulini,

how?

1 Reply

@hence,

If war didn't exist, how could we discuss something that doesn't exist?.. Smile

Reminds me of this great true anecdote in Readers Digest-
A college tutor held up a pencil to his philosophy class and said "Write an essay about this pencil"
At the end of the lesson he collected the essays and gave top marks to the one by a student who'd simply written two words-
"What pencil"?

1 Reply

@Romeo Fabulini,

is that when you stab the student in the face with a penicil and say what penicil?

1 Reply

@contrex,

why?

0 Replies

@hence,

If we were stabbed in the face with a pencil perhaps it'd only hurt and bleed IF we believed we'd been stabbed.. Wink

Another true story with immense philosophical depth that touches on the nature of reality/illusion springs to mind-
One of the elephants in a procession in Delhi charged into the crowd, and people scattered to get out of the way, including a mystic who was among them.
But as he belonged to a sect that believes life and reality are merely illusions, people began jokingly taunting him with- "But if the elephant was just an illusion, why did you move out of its way?", to which he replied-
"I only appeared to move"

0 Replies

@dalehileman,

dalehileman wrote:

Thus the most ignorant humanoid reasons and philosophizes just as the very intelligent professor; to some extent so do cat and dog, the flea, the bacterium; the atom; the neutron

That's conjecture. You don't know if cats, dogs, fleas, bacterium, the atom and the neutron reason and philosophize.

1 Reply

@PhilipOSopher,

There will never be any universal philosophy on humanity. Just look at all the different political parties and religions in this world. Add to that the different races, ethnicities, and cultures. It's an impossible subject to discuss, because everybody has their own ideas about good and bad, war and peace, love and hate, biological vs environment influences, parents, siblings, friends, education, values, and how we interact with others throughout our lives.

Human constructs are subjective, and not universal.

1 Reply

I have to agree with InfraBlue contra dalehileman. Philosophy is a wholly human concept, a unique exercise in rational thought. It's interesting to note that in some cultures the word has a slightly pejorative connotation. My father used to scoff, "That's just philosophy" if he disagreed with a sentiment that just seemed too abstruse or high-falutin' to him.

0 Replies

@PhilipOSopher,

PhilipOSopher wrote:

'Philosophy is dependent on humanity.' Discuss...
I'd like to put this forward as a topic for discussion as it can be interpreted in many different ways, and hopefully it'll get some good ideas in response. E.g., are philosophy and the capacities of both reasoning and thought within it transcendent concepts or are they things that are invented by/only make sense if there are human beings to use them?
Also, are the ideas encountered in philosophy only worthwhile if we use them in terms of human constructs? For example, if we removed war from the world today for all time, would ethical ideas concerning it such as Just War theory be rendered totally meaningless?
Please feel free to interpret the statement for discussion above in any way - I've tried to make it as ambiguous as I can (although maybe that's not too helpful:/...)
Phil

First off philosophy is a natural and inevitable part of man. We must create them/ follow them to guide are lives.

Secondly, philosophy is inescapable for man. Whether or not other organisms and species can philosophize is a different story. You either accept a philosophy consciously or you piece it together subconsciously, resulting in some mongrel position.

Thirdly, don't ever be ambiguous on a philosophy forum, or in life. You'll never get the answers you want if you work that way. Trust me. It doesn't help.

2 Replies

@Ding an Sich,

It probably works pretty well as a course in college to discuss specific areas of knowledge and perception, but reality is subjective to each individual. Just the topic of religion will never be solved in any class. It becomes more complex when you have three or four different religious students and several atheists to discuss why their realities are more viable than the others. It just cannot be done.

1 Reply

Is philosophy dependent on humanity?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know