Academic Philosophy vs Socratic Philosophy
-
- Posts: 231
- Joined: April 2nd, 2016, 8:12 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Jiddu Krishnamurti
- Location: Minneapolis, MN
- Contact:
Academic Philosophy vs Socratic Philosophy
-
- Posts: 37
- Joined: March 23rd, 2017, 12:38 pm
Re: Academic Philosophy vs Socratic Philosophy
Today's focus is on knowing "what to think" as opposed to "how to think' - What does this mean ? Descartes dedicated much of his work to establishing a methodology for valid thought. Russell was a logician and influential in the development analytic philosophy which is itself a methodology for 'thinking', more so was actively involved in social-political issues.
'It saddens me to see how dependent man is upon authority and security, which are illusions. In turn, he has become more confused and fearful.' - I don't understand the relevance of this assertion or how you came to that conclusion. Without an argument your assertion is the very dogma or illusion which you are attempting to reject.
'
-
- Posts: 3601
- Joined: February 28th, 2014, 4:50 pm
Re: Academic Philosophy vs Socratic Philosophy
From the publisher’s description of Hadot’s book:
From the publisher’s description of Nehamas’ book:This book presents a history of spiritual exercises from Socrates to early Christianity, an account of their decline in modern philosophy, and a discussion of the different conceptions of philosophy that have accompanied the trajectory and fate of the theory and practice of spiritual exercises. Hadot's book demonstrates the extent to which philosophy has been, and still is, above all else a way of seeing and of being in the world.
wiley.com/WileyCDA/WileyTitle/productCd ... 80338.html
For much of its history, philosophy was not merely a theoretical discipline but a way of life, an "art of living." This practical aspect of philosophy has been much less dominant in modernity than it was in ancient Greece and Rome, when philosophers of all stripes kept returning to Socrates as a model for living. The idea of philosophy as an art of living has survived in the works of such major modern authors as Montaigne, Nietzsche, and Foucault. Each of these writers has used philosophical discussion as a means of establishing what a person is and how a worthwhile life is to be lived. In this wide-ranging, brilliantly written account, Alexander Nehamas provides an incisive reevaluation of Socrates' place in the Western philosophical tradition and shows the importance of Socrates for Montaigne, Nietzsche, and Foucault.
http://www.ucpress.edu/book.php?isbn=9780520224902
-
- Posts: 231
- Joined: April 2nd, 2016, 8:12 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Jiddu Krishnamurti
- Location: Minneapolis, MN
- Contact:
Re: Academic Philosophy vs Socratic Philosophy
I see philosophy as tool for living a better life as opposed to theorizing different topics, concepts, or ideas which have little or no tangible practicality. Motive, approach and objective are the three major differences between ancient and modern philosophy.
-- Updated March 24th, 2017, 1:25 pm to add the following --
Consequently, the end result is different, especially in respect to effectiveness and practicality.
-
- Posts: 3601
- Joined: February 28th, 2014, 4:50 pm
Re: Academic Philosophy vs Socratic Philosophy
This may be to a greater or lesser extent a problem of translation and linguistic sedimentation. The term ‘spiritual’ has accrued religious connotations that were always part of the meaning of the term. It is a matter of transformative practice, self transformation. What one does is a consequence of what one is.I see Socrates as being more practical than spiritual.
-
- Posts: 231
- Joined: April 2nd, 2016, 8:12 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Jiddu Krishnamurti
- Location: Minneapolis, MN
- Contact:
Re: Academic Philosophy vs Socratic Philosophy
The statement "What one does is a consequence of what one is" is another way of expressing what you start with is what you end with or the end result is the same as what you started with, regardless of what either are called.
My approach to truth is different because I challenge and test my understanding using three different ways. If the understanding is scientific, I challenge and test it by examining it philosophically and spirituality If it is spiritual, I challenge it and test it through the use of philosophy and science. And if is philosophical, I use science and spirituality. The findings of all need to be in agreement. As far as I know, there is no name or label for what I do.
-
- Posts: 3601
- Joined: February 28th, 2014, 4:50 pm
Re: Academic Philosophy vs Socratic Philosophy
The practice of self transformation means that to the extent you are successful transforming yourself you are no longer what you were. It is a matter of becoming the best you are capable of being.The statement "What one does is a consequence of what one is" is another way of expressing what you start with is what you end with or the end result is the same as what you started with, regardless of what either are called.
-
- Posts: 37
- Joined: March 23rd, 2017, 12:38 pm
Re: Academic Philosophy vs Socratic Philosophy
My approach to truth is different because I challenge and test my understanding using three different ways. If the understanding is scientific, I challenge and test it by examining it philosophically and spirituality If it is spiritual, I challenge it and test it through the use of philosophy and science. And if is philosophical, I use science and spirituality. The findings of all need to be in agreement. As far as I know, there is no name or label for what I do.
The limitations of language is not a valid statement in defense of an assertion. The inability to develop an argument renders the 'argument' invalid. Your stating that it cant be communicated or understood by anyone but you as the individual- if that is true (no way to verify) then the assertion itself is meaningless in discussion and has no relevance in philosophical discussion. I do not understand your "approach' (Define) to truth, understanding implies the truth of a thing, given your argument I fail to understand how you can determine a category of methodology to 'approach' truth - it presupposes that you have an understanding of a thing before the application of your methodology, therefore you assert a particular attribute of a thing as truth before you employ the method you use to determine it. Its a contradiction. Its concerning that your entire statement lacks an argument, lacks an understanding of the work you referenced, lacks a definition of the very questions you posed and your response is both invalid, tautological and by your own emission can not be expressed.
The statement "What one does is a consequence of what one is" is another way of expressing what you start with is what you end with or the end result is the same as what you started with, regardless of what either are called.
This statement has no relevance to your previous statement. The analogy is invalid as well as the conclusion you draw from it. Essentially your stating philosophy and truth/validity has no relevance in the external world, perhaps an argument could be made if thats what you intended but by stating this in the external world (the forum) you are contradicting yourself. If you disagree using the same methodology you again contradict yourself, you contradict yourself because what you call truth/philosophy, as you stated, cannot be communicated, a statement about nothing based on a dogma in a forum and in a field that denounces such untruths. How you perceive a thing is not an argument for its validity and many of the statements made particularly regarding Socrates and at least 3 of the other thinkers you refer to appear as misinformation to the extent that It seems you picked 4 thinkers out of a hat without reading any of there work. Its entirely possible that you have an argument (not stated) but given your methodology it appears as untruth and unsubstantiated claims.
I think Nietzsche says it best - ' a casual stroll through a lunatic asylum shows us that faith proves nothing'
-
- Posts: 3364
- Joined: April 19th, 2009, 11:45 pm
Re: Academic Philosophy vs Socratic Philosophy
I agree. At one time philosophy served to open the mind. It was considered the love of wisdom. Academic philosophy has turned it into the love of argument - of being right even in ones own imagination. Academic philosophy closes the mind. Philosophy as a tool to nourish our higher parts is now considered an antiquated idea getting in the way of "education."Eaglerising wrote:Unlike in the past, today's focus is on academic philosophy rather than what I call Socratic philosophy or an authentic quest for truth. This causes me to wonder about the future of meaningful philosophy, a philosophy that changes the life of the inquirer as opposed to playing intellectual gymnastics. Thanks to academic philosophy, most see philosophy as a belief, theory or opinion rather than as a tool. Thus, there is Descartes' philosophy, Huxley's philosophy, Rand's philosophy, and Russell's philosophy as opposed to a generic tool for understanding the nature of life and man's relationship to life, so he can improve the quality of his life. A tool that isn't founded upon or anchored to any authority as academic philosophy is. Today's focus is on knowing "what to think" as opposed to "how to think." It saddens me to see how dependent man is upon authority and security, which are illusions. In turn, he has become more confused and fearful.
How would you suggest keeping philosophy available to the young who need its nourishment but are being spiritually killed in society and in schools by the effects of academic philosophy?
-
- Posts: 231
- Joined: April 2nd, 2016, 8:12 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Jiddu Krishnamurti
- Location: Minneapolis, MN
- Contact:
Re: Academic Philosophy vs Socratic Philosophy
I am not saying philosophy ought to be limited and practiced uniformly. That would be impractical and illogical because everyone is different. I was merely pointing out the difference between the two philosophies. The limitations of language frequently cause misunderstandings because everyone is unique. No two people have the same vocabulary, have the same definition for the words in their vocabulary, express themselves the same way, have the same emotional attachment to various words, and have had the same experiences.
Knowledge can be transferred from one individual to another. Understanding isn’t transferable because it is gained through experience and people don’t experience everything the same. Having knowledge about the Teton Mountains isn’t the same as personally experiencing them. Those who have had more experience at something generally have a better understanding than those that don’t.
I don’t view your or my way of doing something is being superior or inferior, but as being different. I have no interest or desire in believing anything. I either “don’t know” something or I understand it. I view things as a “possibility” rather than as a conclusion until I understand them. And, I understand very little. I approach my investigations from the “unknown” as opposed to the known. I have no interest or desire in proving anything. You can reject my posts, criticize them, or view them as a possibility and investigate them.
The ability to see “authority” and “security” as illusions has to come from within you, as opposed from someone or something externally from you. That’s because thought will reject anything that conflicts with what you believe. Your previous post clearly illustrated that.
-- Updated March 24th, 2017, 9:49 pm to add the following --
Nick_A, you asked a very good question: "How would you suggest keeping philosophy available to the young who need its nourishment but are being spiritually killed in society and in schools by the effects of academic philosophy?"
By having school districts, schools, and teacher who are wise enough to expose it to their students. There is a strong possibility that the major problem in education is educators believing they know and understand education.
-
- Posts: 3364
- Joined: April 19th, 2009, 11:45 pm
Re: Academic Philosophy vs Socratic Philosophy
I think you would agree tht true philosophy has to begin with a recognition of the human condition as it exists within us. Plato described the human condition in his famous cave allegory. But as you suggested, knowledge is one thing and understanding is another. Teachers taking pride in academic philosophy often do not know that philosophy reveals the human condition and what is meant by leaving the cave.Eaglerising wrote:Dissimulation – you answered some of your own questions in your response to my post about Socratic (ancient) philosophy and academic (modern) philosophy taught in colleges. You did it when you pointed out some of the differences between your perception and mine.
I am not saying philosophy ought to be limited and practiced uniformly. That would be impractical and illogical because everyone is different. I was merely pointing out the difference between the two philosophies. The limitations of language frequently cause misunderstandings because everyone is unique. No two people have the same vocabulary, have the same definition for the words in their vocabulary, express themselves the same way, have the same emotional attachment to various words, and have had the same experiences.
Knowledge can be transferred from one individual to another. Understanding isn’t transferable because it is gained through experience and people don’t experience everything the same. Having knowledge about the Teton Mountains isn’t the same as personally experiencing them. Those who have had more experience at something generally have a better understanding than those that don’t.
I don’t view your or my way of doing something is being superior or inferior, but as being different. I have no interest or desire in believing anything. I either “don’t know” something or I understand it. I view things as a “possibility” rather than as a conclusion until I understand them. And, I understand very little. I approach my investigations from the “unknown” as opposed to the known. I have no interest or desire in proving anything. You can reject my posts, criticize them, or view them as a possibility and investigate them.
The ability to see “authority” and “security” as illusions has to come from within you, as opposed from someone or something externally from you. That’s because thought will reject anything that conflicts with what you believe. Your previous post clearly illustrated that.
-- Updated March 24th, 2017, 9:49 pm to add the following --
Nick_A, you asked a very good question: "How would you suggest keeping philosophy available to the young who need its nourishment but are being spiritually killed in society and in schools by the effects of academic philosophy?"
By having school districts, schools, and teacher who are wise enough to expose it to their students. There is a strong possibility that the major problem in education is educators believing they know and understand education.
Simone is right. Academic philosophy has become parroting and I agree with you that something important has been lost. Keeping the good of philosophy alive isn't so easy.Simone Weil lamented that education had become no more than "an instrument manipulated by teachers for manufacturing more teachers, who in their turn will manufacture more teachers." rather than a guide to getting out of the cave.
-- Updated Fri Mar 24, 2017 10:20 pm to add the following --
Eaglerising, For some reason I cannot reply by a PM. You may have deactivated something.
-
- Posts: 37
- Joined: March 23rd, 2017, 12:38 pm
Re: Academic Philosophy vs Socratic Philosophy
-
- Posts: 37
- Joined: March 23rd, 2017, 12:38 pm
Re: Academic Philosophy vs Socratic Philosophy
truth and philosophical argumentation is verified by critical reasoning and logic in the argument. without such practice philosophy is reduced to theology or belief.
- -1-
- Posts: 878
- Joined: December 1st, 2016, 2:23 am
Re: Academic Philosophy vs Socratic Philosophy
If this were actually true, then all education would be wasted on all the kids who do not become teachers.Simone Weil wrote: Simone Weil lamented that education had become no more than "an instrument manipulated by teachers for manufacturing more teachers, who in their turn will manufacture more teachers." rather than a guide to getting out of the cave.
Is that an actual fact?
Or should we take SW's statement with a grain of salt?
And if we take the statement with a grain of salt... does that mean we automatically allow all statements to be called "true" even if there is only a statistical correspondence to some arbitrary compliance (ie. true 50% of the time, or 23% of the time, etc.)?
If all statements that we call "true" are only actually true a certain percentage of time, then their opposite may also be "true".
Which means that a statement and its exact opposite could both be true at the same time and in the same respect.
Which is absurd.
Therefore Simone Weil proposes that a statement be accepted as true, when it is not true.
Therefore I suggest that Simone Weil is a ninni when you think of him (or of her?) as a philosopher.
(Boy, I have been wanting to say that for a long time... finally a proof came along to help me formulate my opinion into a formal argument.)
-- Updated 2017 March 26th, 2:35 am to add the following --
The same fear exists inasmuch as engineers may think they understand engineering, and doctors may think they understand medicine, and street sweepers may think they understand street sweeping.There is a strong possibility that the major problem in education is educators believing they know and understand education.
-
- Posts: 231
- Joined: April 2nd, 2016, 8:12 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Jiddu Krishnamurti
- Location: Minneapolis, MN
- Contact:
Re: Academic Philosophy vs Socratic Philosophy
"There is a strong possibility that the major problem in education is educators believing they know and understand education."
You also applied the statement to engineers, doctors, and street sweepers.
It it a fear or something different?
-- Updated March 26th, 2017, 2:44 am to add the following --
Please explain, is it a fear or something else?
2024 Philosophy Books of the Month
2023 Philosophy Books of the Month
Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023
Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023