The useless questions in philosophy

I think that many people spend so much time discussing things which are absolutely useless for them. Moreover, they become enemies because of disagreement between each other. So what are those useless questions in philosophy: I may indicate only the general line but everybody can easily further it. "Is there such thing as God?" Why do we need to know that? What will it change if the question would be resolved in the positive side?

O.K. there is God, why should I obey him? -- Because he will punish thee for thy disobedience. -- What if I am not afraid of punishment? -- ...
O.K. there is no God, we descended from apes, we are biochemical robots. What does it change again?
People generally think that if there is something like God or the World Order, this gives them the sense of life, whereas no one said that we should obey that order.
Another questions are: is the world knowable or unknowable, real or unreal etc. Neither solution of these questions adds something to our well-being.
When people defend either side of discussion they actually defend their life style: believer defends his adherence to the commandments of his church, he thinks that if there is no god, he will have no power to struggle against his lusts. Materialist defends his hedonism because if there is something more than this reality, he thinks, he will have to obey that ruler and give up his pleasures.
The only thing that matters is our happiness. Thus we need to understand what contributes to it and give up useless speculations which may be held out of mere curiosity when essential questions are resolved.

I think that many people spend so much time discussing things which are absolutely useless for them. Moreover, they become enemies because of disagreement between each other.

The only thing that matters is our happiness. Thus we need to understand what contributes to it and give up useless speculations which may be held out of mere curiosity when essential questions are resolved.

But look at all the other things people spend time on which are useless: Watching baseball, going to concerts, playing chess, falling in love, eating tasty food instead of plain food, going on vacations, going to museums, reading, and last, but not least, discussing the question of why people spend time discussing things that are absolutely useless for them.

I do agree that certain aspects do not make for good discussion. Like if you had a time machine would you go back in time and murder Hitler. I think they are childish questions and they really don't do anything productive except determine who justifies murder and who doesn't.

I think that many people spend so much time discussing things which are absolutely useless for them.

Another questions are: is the world knowable or unknowable, real or unreal etc.

What if questions are fun!!:a-ok:

Also surely if something has a even purely recreational use, it still has a use.

This is pretty much why people discuss things in the first place. Since there is usually pros and cons for both sides of the issue, it is difficult to convince anyone and comes down to pointing out which one has the fewest amount of flaws or cons.

First of all, the question itself is as natural to humanity as shitting brown.

From our knowledge of our own mortality, we develop a self-awareness which in turn develops a rationality. Applying this rationality to our environment, we can overcome the sense of chaos of the world by applying reason and discovering patterns behind the natural order. How did those patterns come to be--and why were we humans, of all the animals, the ones to have the reason to discover and talk about those patterns? Are these not natural questions to ask?

Also, the broader amount of answers/positions you have heard about or come up with expands the consciousness to varying degrees. A question about God is about as abstract as it can get. The more abstract you push your brain, the wider its capacity for seeking patterns in everyday life, the better you become at applying abstractions pragmatically. This is how the human being gains power. You also begin to apply Ockham's razor to the issue itself, allowing you to see through the endless amounts of excess verbiage out there, and you are less liable to be fooled by semantical mystification, not only in spiritual matters but even in politics and society.

You cannot hide from the God-question, as I outlined above.

I think philosophical questions are only useless when people think that they are the path to truth.

Philosophical questions are useful when people see them as opportunities for personal growth and authenticity, and they're useful when they can be applied (like in ethics).

I doubt that people who discuss these questions are doing so for "personal growth".

Some are, some aren't. Call it enrichment or intellectual stimulation if you want, they're close enough concepts. I think you really can get a great deal out of philosophy if you see abstract thought as a reflection of the way your own mind works.

You mean that they try to answer philosophical questions with the motive of intellectual stimulation, and not to try to answer the questions?

Is that what I said? Nope.