The Philosopy of Curiosity

Joanne, I'm not sure that it is proper to speak of a philosophy of curiosity. I don't think there is such a field of study, but it is certainly possible to wax philosophical about curiosity.

I think curiosity and imagination go hand in hand. They drive much of what we do and think and believe. When we are curious about something unknown, the imagination will supply no end of images, explanations, and possibilities. Consider a little curiosity like "is there life on other planets." The imagination can go wild with that one.

http://www.csun.edu/~vcpsy00h/students/explore.htm

...perhaps auseful starting point.

IMO, curiosity is the constant searching for new and different possibilities. It is the capacity of human beings to be able to conceptualize beyond what is presently known, and has probably had the greatest impact on the evolution of man.

A society that is not curious, is a static society. You may observe this phenomenon amongst those societies that are not free. Imagination is stifled, and gains are modest.

I believe that the US has become the greatest society in this world because of the freedom, the freedom to be curious, and to act upon the curiosity, that we enjoy. We are able to expand our knowledge, to satisfy our thirst for greater and greater knowledge and understanding. This ability to indulge our imaginations has brought forth a torrent of innovation and new ideas.

I do not wish to turn this thread into a political one. But I have to say that a government that attempts to regulate and curtail innovation and scientific progress, will move backwards, not forward.

The "dark ages" were a terrible period in history, where repression and superstition reigned. Civilization stagnated. It was only during the Renaissance, when curiosity and imagination were encouraged, that civilization started to move forward again, after centuries of stultifying lack of intellectual growth.

Phoenix - it is somewhat off topic, but I really must take issue with some of what you have said: eg. "I believe that the US has become the greatest society in this world....."

Hello?! Sorry? When did that happen? Who decreed that? Do you mean the country with the greatest number of bombs? The biggest economy? I personally do not consider the US to be the greatest society in the world, by any definition! I do not consider ANY country to be that!!!! Lines in the sand in the playground, for godsake - accidents of history - that is what countries are to me.

The USA is, for its time in the sun (or darkness), the most powerful single country in this brief time and place - history teaches us that that is a passing thing. I have admiration for much that is American, and other feelings for much else - perhaps if you defined your terms I would be less gob-smacked - but my gob is stunned right now!


And the "Dark Ages" - I believe you will find that history has been re-evaluating this way of thinking for some time.

As for curiosity - this seems to be a thing shared by most living things - as anyone with any experience of animals will tell you.

Who has not been quizzed by groups of creatures - from fish to mammals, if they venture near their haunts - soon enough any activity is audited by any available shiny eyes, moist muzzles, questing whiskers, chitinous exoskeletons or spy-hopping cetacean eyes.

Curiosity must be an itch needing scratching for most things that can move - a hard-wired thing, perhaps? With the evolutionary advantage that, despite casualties, it meant that the environment was explored and maximised? That food-sources were noted by all - dangers marked - excitement and stimulation found - learning maximised?

dlowan- You caught me with my pants down. Sorry for the puffery. It is true that great cultures have come and gone through the ages. In a burst of nationalistic ethnocentrism, I was simply stating what I believe is so at this time.

Yes, it is true that all creatures have the capacity for curiosity and innovation. The main difference amongst human beings, is that we DO have the greater capability of conceptualizing, of imagining into the future, of thinking ahead. This ability allows us to harness our environment to a DEGREE that is not attainable by other organisms.

Animals can find shelter in a storm, but cannot build the shelter, except in a most rudimentary fashion. Animals, to a much greater extent than humans, are held hostage to the whims of nature. Human beings, because of their greater brain capacity, have the ability to modify our life conditions.

An animal's life is bound by seeking and obtaining those things that will ensure both his own survival and survival of the species. Although one might detect elementary forms of culture in the animal kingdom, it has developed nowhere near the level of human culture.

I would expect that primitive man, lived very much like the higher animals, concentrating their lives on finding food, clothing, shelter, and reproducing. As the higher centers of man's brain developed, he freed himself more and more from the shackles of this limited existence. What freed him was this curiosity, this ability to to think beyond the present, and conceptualize ideas into plans, and plans into actions.

As for your point about the Middle Ages, I am aware that history has found that there WERE innovators, that the culture was not as static as thought in the past. The fact remains, that these times of overriding superstition, with the emphasis on conformity to religious strictures, that there was a retardation of cultural evolution, that civilization did not emerge from, in an unmistakable fashion, until the Renaissance!

Phoenix, although I would take a bow to Dlowan's questioning of your slightly exaggerated view of the glories of American civilization, I will stick my neck out for you at least this far: if you expand American Civilization to mean Western Civilization, I will go on record as saying that I think it has at least as much to say for it as any other civilization I know of. I do not mean that Western Civilization does not have it's grievous short comings, but that in many of its philosophical underpinnings there is nothing to equal it.

I say this despite being a postmodernist and moral and cultural relativist.

So your relativism is relative? LOL

I know what you mean...

Joan:

I'm not so convinced that the Space program will continue. For one thing, it's getting too expensive. For another, the "lab experiments" performed in space have little to do with life on earth. For example, one "study" in space concerned crystalization of proteins. Why crystalization of protein in a zero gravity field, would be relevant to human life and reproduction on Earth is beyond me.

Doe anyone really believe that a % of the human race will one day make outer space their permanent home? What a way to live! I can't imagine anything more depressing.

Dlowan, I agree with you that curiosity is a trait that we humans share with other animals. Who has not wondered at the famous "curiosity of a cat?" The great faculty that we humans seem to have to ourselves is imagination. It is our imagination that empowers us to think that dead people come back to life, that rocks are somehow possessed of a soul, that consciousness survives the death of the brain, that there is life on other planets, that space is curved, that the earth is flat, and on and on.

I think it is the interplay of imagination and curiosity that helps to make life so interesting.

Dlowan and Phoenix
Somewhere in the middle of what you both have said is a profound truth. I am making a copy of this encounter for my files. Thank you.

It seems to me that even though one culture may have no more absolute reason than another to call itself superior, we all must decide for ourselves how we want to live and by what set of rules. I happen to like the set-up of Western Civilization. For one thing it is one of the few civilizations where one can espouse the present point of view (At least, as of this moment, I'm still free to think this way in the U.S.).

You guys are great I am learning a lot here. That link fresco is wonderful.

Western Civilization, hmmm, after serveral years in Japan I cannot exlude Asia or Pan Asia.

Of course, Hazlitt, I agree - however - will not the overwhelming mass of us "choose" the culture with which we are familiar - that has formed our very neuronal pathways, the dress which delineates our thoughts, the world which it is possible for us to see?


I find cultural and ethical relativism an easy intellectual exercise, but an emotional impossiblity - I therefore use the intellectual structure to mediate and mollify my "instinctive" preferences - sort of like controling a horse - but there are places my horse refuses to go...

Dlowan, You are of course right about the emotional aspects of staying connected to ones own culture.

I am mostly interested in comparisons of systems of government, systems of justice, theories of religion and state, structure of economies, and the philosophy underpinning all of this. I personally throw in my lot with the west. I think we have a more workable system.

I say this fully acknowledging that much of what we have done has not always worked very well.

Joanne, I too have admiration for the Japanese and Asian cultures.