Need view on specific topic.

[Clory]

Hello, I'm student in bachelor philosophy and I'm writing a paper on how philosophy is helping to actual public. Could you share your view? I have hard time finding any evidence. I guess the main point is bringing of ''stezius mairaza'' thinking to outgoing axons of subjects thinking.

[Alec Smart]

Hello, I'm student in bachelor philosophy and I'm writing a paper on how philosophy is helping to actual public.

I hope you're not attempting to write it in English.

[Renee]

Hello, I'm student in bachelor philosophy and I'm writing a paper on how philosophy is helping to actual public. Could you share your view?

You're doomed. Philosophy does not help the public at all. Philosophers are a self-entertaining club, trying to publicly outsmart each other. That's about the size of it.

Philosophy is only taught in school because there are philosophy teachers. And there are philosophy teachers because schools churn them out regularly.

The origin of academic philosophy stems in the dark ages, when there was no or very, very little empirical knowledge of the world, and therefore there was nothing to teach. But universities had to teach something, that was their mandate, so they taught philosophy, law, medicine and religion. Note, please, that two of these subject areas are essentially nothing else but complete, unadulterated, sheer BS.

-- Updated November 20th, 2016, 8:57 pm to add the following --

I hope you're not attempting to write it in English.

Newspeak. This is how 98.9 percent of new college entrants speak and write. This student is actually good, he's better than the rest - he knows how to use spellcheck. Most new students can't write but in TXT. Almost all of them don't know all the upper case letters of the alphabet.

And this is only the language. You should see their math skills. Ask them to divide 100 by 10, and they will pull out a calculator.

Other than language and math skills, high school teaches nothing else to students. Academically.

[Dolphin42]

Many people who go on to work in politics study philosophy. Philosophy, Politics and Economics is a popular combination. Depending on your view of politicians in general, you might argue that this demonstrates its utility. I would say that a knowledge of the history and philosophical underpinnings of political movements around the world is a pretty useful foundation for a political career and (despite what you might think about politicians) politics is all about people, and the legislative decisions that affect their lives. It doesn't get much more important than that, does it?

[Burning ghost]

Down pdf of this essay by George Orwell :

"Politics and the English Language"

Should give you a good base to work from.

[Renee]

Many people who go on to work in politics study philosophy. Philosophy, Politics and Economics is a popular combination. Depending on your view of politicians in general, you might argue that this demonstrates its utility. I would say that a knowledge of the history and philosophical underpinnings of political movements around the world is a pretty useful foundation for a political career and (despite what you might think about politicians) politics is all about people, and the legislative decisions that affect their lives. It doesn't get much more important than that, does it?

Yes, it is important; that's why political science in western-type democracies has boiled down to vote-mongering, deception, and uttering false promises.

This, you say, Dolphin42, is greatly aided by a grounding in economics, philosophy and political studies.

This, I say, makes my face burn in shame to admit to being a philosopher, when I see the abuse of philosophical knowledge, skills and know-how by politicians to help under the disguise of bettering the lot of mankind to make the rich richer, the poor poorer, and cause endless suffering for a lot of people around the world.

[Ormond]

I would think that philosophy might be a good undergraduate training for anyone thinking of going to law school.

[WorldThief]

Philosophy has a trickle down effect. Deep thinking goes on in some isolated academy. A popularized version is written, dumbed-down perhaps but perhaps more accessible and perhaps even improved in a simplified form ("A scholar says a simple thing in a complicated way, an artist says a complicated thing in a simple way" -- Charles Bukowski (paraphrased)). So I wouldn't argue specialized 'philosophers' are any more helpful than artists or musicians or poets or fiction writers or TV comedians or anyone else. But everyday, people make decisions, and there are many factors influencing those decisions. People in the past made different decisions -- kill the gays, burn the witches, don't cut down the trees, build a stone circle, etc. etc. Some level of philosophy is effecting all of these decisions. But does it help? Only as much as it hurts, I suppose. It depends on if you think the world is improving or just running on a treadmill.

[Renee]

Philosophy has a trickle down effect. Deep thinking goes on in some isolated academy. A popularized version is written, dumbed-down perhaps but perhaps more accessible and perhaps even improved in a simplified form ("A scholar says a simple thing in a complicated way, an artist says a complicated thing in a simple way" -- Charles Bukowski (paraphrased)). So I wouldn't argue specialized 'philosophers' are any more helpful than artists or musicians or poets or fiction writers or TV comedians or anyone else. But everyday, people make decisions, and there are many factors influencing those decisions. People in the past made different decisions -- kill the gays, burn the witches, don't cut down the trees, build a stone circle, etc. etc. Some level of philosophy is effecting all of these decisions. But does it help? Only as much as it hurts, I suppose. It depends on if you think the world is improving or just running on a treadmill.

I was thinking about religions in the same vein.

Every religion has tons of useful stuff, and tons of useless restrictions. Thou shalt not kill; thou shalt not eat meat on Fridays; thou shalt not steal; though must not cook a kid in its mother's milk.

Each religion tends to teach the same useful stuff, generally, and teach different completely useless restrictions.

Yet life goes on in every society, no matter how much restrictive code people must memorize and practice.

It seems that restrictive religious dogma inconveniences individuals, but it does not hinder social and societal progress. Each country in the world now has hospitals, hotels, military, agriculture, industry of sorts, prisons and schools. No matter what the dominant religion may be there in the local community.

[TSBU]

Even the definition of philosophy is obscure, and I think that academic philosophy is useless too, I mean, of course, there are good "philosophers" i n history and it may be worth it to read their books, but you can do that in your home. I agree with something I read from Dumas, something like "we can't have the same philosophy, that can't be taught, each person has his own philosophy", and, if we think in philosophy as the deepest knowledges in human mind, nearly the "operative system", then, of course it's useful to think and know other people.
The common thing for people is to think only a bit and copy their parents behaviour and what they usually see in the street. Thinking about philosophy make people "think for themselves". But that can't be put like something "good for society" and can't be proved.