Humility in Philosophy

True.

I prefer the teachings of the ancient Taoist philosopher, Rums-Feld:
As we know,
There are known knowns.
There are things we know we know.
We also know
There are known unknowns.
That is to say
We know there are some things
We do not know.
But there are also unknown unknowns,
The ones we don't know
We don't know.

Heavy, man, totally deep.

He, he. Love it!

Whatcha know, Joe.
I don't know nothin'
Whatcha know, Joe
I don't know nothin'
Whatcha know, Joe,
I don't know nothin'
I ain't talkin',
I don't know.

I always thought that Donald Rumsfeld looked like Nick Nolte. Now, I don't know.

Humility is the essence of philosophy; philosophy as a source of human enquiry, most definitely informs humility.

But they are somewhat like fire and water; one from the machinations of the heart, and the other born of the processes of the mind!

A philosopher who does not operate with humility, is a fool.

In the 'pond' of knowledge, if one cannot see how much elludes us,
one may as well not look.

And Cav; criticizing the detail in a new 'contribution' is "counter-producent"!

Hey, stillman. Now's your chance. Bo has an error in his response.

Sorry, Bo. Need to keep you humble.

and, incidentally, Bo. Good to see you back.

Letty;

'error', ME!

utter rubbish!

er, Bo. I now see another error. MINE. Sorry, StillMIND!

Krishnamurti said "Where the self is, love is not".

In view of the defintion of philosophy as "love of wisdom", we might be tempted to add.. "and philosophy is not ".....but this would be to take idealism to an extreme since all debate is to some extent the seeking of "consensus".

The "better" philosophers tend to debate publically with themselves. Whether this is (1) "humility", (2) a style which endears the audience or (3) insurance against semantic diversions , is itself a matter of debate !

What goes on here is of course much more complex than "straight philosophy"

truth
Great question, Stillman. I do not think of humility as any form of self-deprecation; it is an awareness of the illusory nature of the sense of self. But aside from that, I think that a philosopher must neither be self-aggrandizing nor self-diminishing. And as far as the philosophers I am familar with are concerned the latter is not a problem. Humility, IMO, is a realistic evaluation of one's productions. If an actor says that the Oscar he won should be a reflection of the the following: the actor's ability, the quality of the screenplay, the supporting performances of the other actors in the movie and the skill of the director, I would say ( if this were true) an expression of humility. If it were not, if the Oscar winner really carried the movie virtually by him or herself, this would be an expression of self-deprecation, either for psychological or political reasons. To be humble is to see myself as I am and not to deflate or inflate my achievements--at least to the best of my ability--is true humility, a form of honesty.

Agreed, J.L. I have never cared for competition (not talking capitalism here) for the explicit fact that one knows when he has done well, and when he has NOT done well. He doesn't need to really PROVE anything, nor does he need to be patted on the back nor critiqued to a fault. False humility, as in Uriah Heep, is not the same as humility that helps us grow.

truth
Letty,

Not to me, you won't. I have extremely shallow knowledge and absolutely nothing to say,lol
How does that grab ya ? (like my friend says)

Stillmind

Stillmind, I think you must have had something to say because many mavens have marveled, here.

I do hope you will post more.

welcome

philosopher -- (a wise person who is calm and rational; someone who lives a life of reason with equanimity)

equanimity -- (steadiness of mind under stress; "he accepted their problems with composure and she with equanimity")

humility, humbleness -- (a disposition to be humble; a lack of false pride; "not everyone regards humility as a virtue")

darn wish I would have posted before Letty

Women and children first, husker.

When I taught, we used to develop a handbook that cited the expectations of the system. The introduction was always called "Philosophy". Now that term has been changed to "Mission Statement." That may have been, in part, the influence of the behaviorists. Nothing really ever changes, just the argot.

cute - argot

Re: Humility in Philosophy


Might the purity of such a philosopher be shattered by the utterance of his own opinion? If so, then the best of the best will never be heard here, and as such, they would be indistinguishable from those who care nothing for the topic.

And in general, would a philosophy of such purity, as to only listen and observe, be of any use to the world?

I think a view of perfect philosophy might benefit from a balance of teaching as well as learning. It seems to me that it is the interaction, not the answers and the understanding, which give life to philosophy.

Welcome to A2K Stillmind

Best regards,

As soon as I get the chance...
Hi, people !

I'm sorry for delaying the inevitable,lol
I'm very tied up with school at the time,but I will reply to my messages as soon as i get the chance.
Boy, you guys keep busy !

Peace.

stillmind