What Is Philosophy?

Now, if a person asks: “What is philosophy?”

Maybe there are people who will laugh. And I feel there are people who may laugh maybe because they feel strange when such a question is asked.

But why is there a strange feeling?

Maybe because there different people who will come up with different ideas or different thoughts when such as question is asked, and so if a person asks: “What is philosophy?”

I do not even know what to say.

Because a theist says: “Philosophy begins with God.”

An atheist says: “Philosophy begins when you throw away the concept of God.”

And if one person does not agree with the other person, or if there is uncertain feeling, then, one may not be too sure how to answer the question.

Now, this question ‘what is philosophy’ may be a question that may be asked by artist or scientist, because one scientist may not agree with the other scientist.

One artist may not agree with another artist.

If one person does not agree with another person, then, maybe one will ask: “What is philosophy?” What is philosophy? What is science? Does science need to be based on what we see from our eyes?

Because when one person does not agree with the other person, then, he may ask question: “What is philosophy?” Is philosophy about the existence of truth or is there no truth?

This is a question that may be asked again and again, maybe without a satisfactory answer.

A belief system.

To stick to the traditional Greek definition of philosophy, it is the love of wisdom. When you do start to do philosophy though you realise philosophy is such a wide term applying to every area of life. So the more philosophy you do, the more difficult it gets to say what exactly it is because it's so much at once. I personally would say philosophy is the study of thoughts aiming to find truth by gaining knowledge about how things really are.

I also like the ancient greek meaning for "theory". Apparently it used to mean ( or originally meant) "vision".

How about the lack of vision, to use the word in a different sense. Philosophy begins where the words run out and the world itself invades. A man walks into the psychiatrist's office and at the end of his session as he leaves he turns to the psychiatrist and asks her, "Tell me doctor, why are we born to suffer and die?" Of course this analyst is well trained in the art of sublety and her interpersonal skills are impeccable She replies, "Well......errrrr......you see........its just that ....hmmmmmm.....I seem to have......ahh ....." Now who needs the valium?

Yes, theory and philosophy is certainly bastardised by the generally unwise.

-- Updated August 1st, 2012, 9:04 am to add the following --

Other bastardizations of ancient wisdoms. "believe in Christ" was "believe into the Christos" (which was about actually sacrificing belief into the "light" or "Christos"). Unevolved man (again) believing in someone or something they regard as bigger than themselves.

To stick to the traditional Greek definition of philosophy, it is the love of wisdom. When you do start to do philosophy though you realise philosophy is such a wide term applying to every area of life. So the more philosophy you do, the more difficult it gets to say what exactly it is because it's so much at once. I personally would say philosophy is the study of thoughts aiming to find truth by gaining knowledge about how things really are.

^^^This^^^

I think you have to stick with the Greek definition since they both pioneered it and are in my opinion the best at it.

One could add for modern clarity philosophy is the study of all knowledge which has not been given another label. Every science was at one time simply a part of philosophy (medicine, astronomy, physics etc.) until it was given it's own title.

The ability to ponder, and you know.

Philosophy is the burden of knowing that all that you believe and think is merely theoretical. I like this one: The journalist goes to India to interview the Tantra Buddhist and asks her, "You know, when you meditate, when you take your journey into, well, wherever you go; that's it: When you meditate, where do you go?" The Buddhist replied, "I do not go anywhere. But I do realize that here is some place else entirely."

All humans (with exceptions) strive to survive at all costs.
To facilitate the above, humans are driven to acquire a wide range of knowledge* and wisdom.

Question: What is needed to marshall all these varieties of knowledge and put them into focus to achieve optimal results? For example, in a symphony orchestra the art of 'conducting' is a necessity for the conductor to ensure the orchestra play in synchrony.
IMO, the answer is, 'philosophy', it is the art of 'conducting' life to ensure there is optimization for the individual, society, and humanity.

When one confined 'philosophy' to 'ponder life', vision, thinking about thinking, conceptualization, Western Philosophy, academic philosophy, one is merely dealing with the sub or sub-sub definitions of 'what is philosophy'.

IMO, there will never be a fixed authoritative definition for philosophy, but tentatively a practical definition for 'philosophy' should be heirarchical with a main, sub, and sub-definitions to cover all aspects of life.

In this manner, we will have an art for conducting life (like a symphonic orchestra conductor), and we shall call it 'philosophy' and reinstate it to what it was originally established for. (but was bastardized along the way). The philosophical impulse is as fundamental as the sexual impulse to procreate. However, it is an impulse of continuous improvements to facilitate survival with incremental phases.

In anycase, what other faculty or subject has in essence (substance not form) the property to cut across all disciplines, faculties of knowledge and all aspects of life, and to gel them together for optimality.

*Knowledge is a familiarity with someone or something, which can include facts, information, descriptions, or skills acquired through experience or education. It can refer to the theoretical or practical understanding of a subject. It can be implicit (as with practical skill or expertise) or explicit (as with the theoretical understanding of a subject); it can be more or less formal or systematic

In this manner, we will have an art for conducting life (like a symphonic orchestra conductor), and we shall call it 'philosophy' and reinstate it to what it was originally established for. (but was bastardized along the way). The philosophical impulse is as fundamental as the sexual impulse to procreate. However, it is an impulse of continuous improvements to facilitate survival with incremental phases.

Well, I do think at the end of the road somewhere people will figure out how to run their affairs, but whether it will all fall under a comprehensive philosophy is questionable. You do run against the grain here, since most think philosphy is mostly irrelevant to everday affairs. Of course, there is that loose and popular idea, you know, my philosophy of baking is to go easy on the spices, or never get bothered about things too much, that is my philosophy. But then again, difficult philosophy like existentialism does seem to suggest, though not a practical solution to life's problems, a perspective that one day will serve to define who we are. If someone like, say, Nietzsche has his way, we will all forget about metaphysics and god and salvation and just attend to what is here before us in the concrete and learn to live an authentic life. Others have very different views, of course. Philosophy has been bastardized? Some say it has run its course; some will agree with you. Rorty, Heidegger, Wittgenstein,et al think that philosophy has been misled for a long time. I beg to differ.

I always thought of Philosophy as the general study, discussion and pondering of everything around us.

Philosophy is the Greek word - or construction of words - for "Love of Wisdom." However, the Stoics redefined it as 'Striving after Wisdom." The problem we have nowadays, is that people can add another group term to the word philosophy to give the illusion of being great intellectuals - for example "Christian Philosophers" and "University Philosophy Professors" I prefer the Stoic definition, that helped towards creating such quotes as this:

Philosophy teaches us to act, and not just to speak. It demands of everyone that he should actually live by his own standards, that his life should not be out of harmony with his words, and that his inner existence should be of one hue, and fully harmonious with all his outer activities, this, I say, is the highest duty and the highest proof there is real wisdom. [Seneca]

Granth said: ""We" as in our entire species over centuries until this particular time in history where you and I BOTH have adapted to communicate via our shared Western culture."

Personally, I feel all the Western thinkers in the past tried to define what philosophy is, where their definitions could not satisfy me. So maybe this is why I was interested in Zen, because Lao Tsu said that maybe philosophy could not be defined. Where he was expressing that maybe there is a limitation in words or languages that cannot decribe.

Maybe because of this, German philosopher Hegel said that it is meaningless to read Chinese thinkers, because he thought that what the Chinese philosophers were saying were not supported by logic or thinking.

But Lao Tsu did use logical thinking to back up his expression, so if Lao Tsu wants to say that it is better not to think, then, he would argue why no thinking is better than thinking.

If thinking itself is not perfect, then, I feel philosophy is religious or metaphysical, maybe could not be understand through the intellect or could not be understand through languages or words.

In the last century, there were Western writers who were interested in Zen. In my mother's book shelf, I found a book written by English writer Huxley. 'Brave New World' is a book written by him and not long ago, I read a bit about Huxley and he was interested in Zen. He felt that the progress of civilisation; he felt that the progress of technology is like a man smoking drugs, living in a fantasy.

My mother was interested in literature where many her books were novels written by writers.

And I feel Zen might influence Huxley and before, I asked: "Why there are writers in the West who were interested in Zen?"

I feel maybe because the bible which many Western thinkers were familar with, could not answer the problem of the modern society, or could not satisfy the question or doubts that they are asking, and so, maybe they interested in Zen.

Well, I do think at the end of the road somewhere people will figure out how to run their affairs, but whether it will all fall under a comprehensive philosophy is questionable.

The question is how to run one's affair with dynamic optimality to one's changing circumstances.

You do run against the grain here, since most think philosphy is mostly irrelevant to everday affairs. Of course, there is that loose and popular idea, you know, my philosophy of baking is to go easy on the spices, or never get bothered about things too much, that is my philosophy. But then again, difficult philosophy like existentialism does seem to suggest, though not a practical solution to life's problems, a perspective that one day will serve to define who we are.
If someone like, say, Nietzsche has his way, we will all forget about metaphysics and god and salvation and just attend to what is here before us in the concrete and learn to live an authentic life.
Others have very different views, of course.

When people make reference to 'my philosophy of X is, or 'the philosophy of X', they are somehow connecting intuitively with the fundamental philosophical that is inherent in them via evolution.
'My philosophy of X' or 'my philosophy is' imply some elements of optimality and wisdom.
The 'philosophy of X' imply a 'meta' (higher and more refined) consideration of whatever X is.
Philosophy was a 'way of life' for some of the ancient Greeks prior to its bastardization.

Philosophy has been bastardized? Some say it has run its course; some will agree with you. Rorty, Heidegger, Wittgenstein,et al think that philosophy has been misled for a long time. I beg to differ.

Western Philosophy has been bastardized and went off tangent since the advent of Aristotle logic. The veering off of Western Philosophy toward reductionism has definitely contributed to the technological advancement of mankind, but the emphasis to it was not balanced and too skewed. Note Nietzsche bringing in Dionysus to balance with Apollo. At present Western Philosophy is straggling as an academic subject and soon it will merely be called 'critical thinking'.

However, Eastern Philosophy had always maintained a balanced approach and taking into the account the individual together interdependently with its environment and the universe.
There is a great possibility that the Greeks imported philosophy from the Easts.

IMO, when we reinstate 'philosophy' to its original intended meaning, i.e. wisdom and holistic based, there is every thing to gain from this king of knowledge (theorectical and practical) and activity.
Philosophy is the master-key to enable the individual to 'conduct' a symphonically meaningful life.