1
   

The useless questions in philosophy

 
 
jeeprs
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Sep, 2009 04:24 am
@Eudaimon,
Generally my approach is pragmatic. I study philosophy because I think there is such a thing as wisdom. I also really like the history of ideas. It is challenging to read what great thinkers of the past have written and to try and understand how they saw things. Sometimes, I like to 'play with ideas' - there are things I like to consider just for the sake of it. But bottom line is philosophical thinking helps you to be clear, detached, and objective. This is all a part of wisdom.
0 Replies
 
melonkali
 
  1  
Reply Mon 28 Sep, 2009 07:04 pm
@Eudaimon,
Was it Popper who wrote that a metaphysical topic was only meaningful, in its relationship to a specific problem situation? When I read some very abstract philosophical discussions and ideas, I try to figure out, "What problem does this address?"

rebecca
0 Replies
 
Aedes
 
  1  
Reply Mon 28 Sep, 2009 07:26 pm
@Eudaimon,
Good point, Rebecca, though one can conjecture that the 'problem' is that we wrack our brains over these things. The question "what was the cause of everything" is important only because something about us viscerally needs to know.
0 Replies
 
jeeprs
 
  1  
Reply Mon 28 Sep, 2009 07:50 pm
@Eudaimon,
I also agree, Rebecca, I often apply the 'so what' test. So what if this is true? But this can still apply in metaphysics. There are genuine metaphysical problems, but not everyone is genuinely interested in them, and also, when they become subject to academic standardisation and rote learning they certainly can seem to loose all meaning.
0 Replies
 
rhinogrey
 
  1  
Reply Mon 28 Sep, 2009 10:00 pm
@Eudaimon,
Day-to-day cares are actually just a distraction from life's big questions. Many of us ask these questions and ponder them because we don't know how not to. There's nothing else quite as worthwhile.
Aedes
 
  1  
Reply Mon 28 Sep, 2009 10:03 pm
@rhinogrey,
rhinogrey;94186 wrote:
Day-to-day cares are actually just a distraction from life's big questions.
Couldn't you just as easily argue the opposite?
0 Replies
 
rhinogrey
 
  1  
Reply Mon 28 Sep, 2009 10:07 pm
@Eudaimon,
You could, but you'd be wrong. Because day-to-day cares come and go with the individual, with the culture, with the zeitgeist. The big questions have been the same since day one and they will never change, they only manifest themselves in the new forms (ie, changing 'daily reality').
Aedes
 
  1  
Reply Mon 28 Sep, 2009 10:14 pm
@rhinogrey,
rhinogrey;94188 wrote:
but you'd be wrong
Pondering dualism isn't going to stop the lion from eating you.

We are animals -- we can only exist if we accomplish the day-to-day things

Yet we are humans -- we ponder big questions to make the day-to-day things seem less mundane and absurd
rhinogrey
 
  1  
Reply Mon 28 Sep, 2009 10:48 pm
@Aedes,
Aedes;94190 wrote:
Pondering dualism isn't going to stop the lion from eating you.

We are animals -- we can only exist if we accomplish the day-to-day things


We manipulate energy via biological methods but we're not solely biological in our nature.

Yes, we til the land and carry the water. But the drama we introduce into our lives beyond that has taken precedence over the physical sustenance, spiritual and mental-well being of our selves is simply a ridiculous distraction. These most basic matters of day-to-day living that I refer to, are themselves intertwined with the big questions.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

How can we be sure? - Discussion by Raishu-tensho
Proof of nonexistence of free will - Discussion by litewave
morals and ethics, how are they different? - Question by existential potential
Destroy My Belief System, Please! - Discussion by Thomas
Star Wars in Philosophy. - Discussion by Logicus
Existence of Everything. - Discussion by Logicus
Is it better to be feared or loved? - Discussion by Black King
 
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 12/02/2021 at 07:03:58