What Are the Most Important Philosophy Questions and, Are the Questions as Important as Answers?

[JackDaydream]

I never really thought of the importance of questions so much until I began writing threads based upon them. Yet, it was often essay titles at school, and beyond which led me into areas of thought. These included: Are criminals born or made? Is there life after death? Is there anything which is absolutely wrong?

For me, the question of life after death is about the most significant at all, rather than the existence of God. That is because to be mortal or immortal is likely to be essential to how one perceives this life. Often, but not always, the belief in life after death is linked to that of God's existence. The questions about consciousness are interconnected, especially whether consciousness is transcendent or imminent. Of course, in connection with objectivity and subjectivity the issues of science are important for empirical understanding.

Another essential area is how should we live? This may depend on how reality itself is perceived, in relation to priorities, as well as thinking about values. One particular statement of questions which I find useful are those contained in the title of the painting of savages by Gaugin, 'Where Do We Come From? What Are We? Where Are We Going?'

The phrasing or framing within questions make a big difference to the ideas generated. Some may be more answerable than others, and the latter may be rhetorical or a source for contemplation. I find that seeing others' questions as offering new angles for thinking. It also seems that one question may give rise to many others. I would argue that the processes of formulating question is as essential as trying to answer them. Would you agree or not and what do you see as the most important questions to ask?

[Pattern-chaser]

I think that philosophical questions are probably more important than their answers, if they actually have any answers.

There are philosophical questions for which science is the most appropriate tool. They have evidence, and whatever else is necessary to allow a justified conclusion to be reached. Let's set these, easier, questions to one side, and consider the ones that remain.

These are the more difficult questions, the ones that science cannot address. Many of them feature little or no evidence. In considering these questions, I think the journey is as important, or more important, than the destination. It is in the discussion that the interesting stuff lies, especially if it proves impossible to reach a justified conclusion, as it often does with this kind of question.

So my answer to the question in the topic title is that the questions are more important than the answers.

[Pattern-chaser]

I am also reminded of the pollster's motto, that it's how you ask/frame the question that determines the answer(s) you receive. This also seems to form part of your thinking here, yes?

[JackDaydream]

I think that philosophical questions are probably more important than their answers, if they actually have any answers.

There are philosophical questions for which science is the most appropriate tool. They have evidence, and whatever else is necessary to allow a justified conclusion to be reached. Let's set these, easier, questions to one side, and consider the ones that remain.

These are the more difficult questions, the ones that science cannot address. Many of them feature little or no evidence. In considering these questions, I think the journey is as important, or more important, than the destination. It is in the discussion that the interesting stuff lies, especially if it proves impossible to reach a justified conclusion, as it often does with this kind of question.

So my answer to the question in the topic title is that the questions are more important than the answers.

The idea of the journey being 'as important or more important than the destination' captures so much of the quest. It may be why some people dislike philosophy. I have known a few who have began to study philosophy and changed courses because they did not like its speculative nature. I find the discussion areas so interesting and it when a new person joins the forum they often bring a unique slant with a question they raise in a slightly different way.

Of course, some questions like whether God exists and are the mind and body separate seem to be recurrent, although they may be broken down further to get to the basics or subtle complexities of the questions.

It is likely that people ask different ones based on the context of their historical or cultural background. It may be that the questions about consciousness are asked repeatedly, and in different forms in the light of science, especially the growth of cognitive psychology and neuroscience. Some people don't see the relevance of many of the metaphysical questions which may be seen as connected to a past of abstract thinking as opposed to the ones related to what is apparent in day to day appearances of reality. However, it is likely that many still turn to writers of the past for inspiration. It can also be like stepping into another world picture, like visiting another country and I find it useful to read such different perspectives as a challenge. It may not be possible to come up with answers to some of the biggest problems, such as qualia, but it may be about looking at matters from all kinds of viewpoints to see the scope of the problems and, why they are problems.

[stevie]

What Are the Most Important Philosophy Questions and, Are the Questions as Important as Answers?

Three questions appear:
1. What is the self? (related questions might be: 'What/who am I?' or 'Does the self exist?')
2. What is cognition? (a related question might be: What is the relationship between cognition and the cognized?)
3. Are issues 1 and 2 connected? If so, how?

Of course these questions are only momentary snapshots and upon further thinking about the expressions they might appear to be inappropriate and better expressions might arise.
Also I don't think that these questions are suitable for discussion because the conceptual objects expressed are by nature non-evident and thus speculations are likely to abound which is problematic since question 2 has not yet been clarified and also question 1 and 3 appear to be touched upon when it comes to speculations.

[Samana Johann]

What Are the Most Important Philosophy Questions?

As for the case that one seeks for long term happiness by ways of thinking, two questions are wise, importand, to raise: Which kind of thinking, when I take on think in that way, will lead to my long term happiness. Which kind of thinking, when I stop think in that way, will lead to my long term happiness.

Are the Questions as Important as Answers?

What does good householder think: Is there another way of gaining wisdom then to ask, seek for it?

As a side-effect: One's questions give much info about one's understanding.

[JackDaydream]

What Are the Most Important Philosophy Questions and, Are the Questions as Important as Answers?

Three questions appear:
1. What is the self? (related questions might be: 'What/who am I?' or 'Does the self exist?')
2. What is cognition? (a related question might be: What is the relationship between cognition and the cognized?)
3. Are issues 1 and 2 connected? If so, how?

Of course these questions are only momentary snapshots and upon further thinking about the expressions they might appear to be inappropriate and better expressions might arise.
Also I don't think that these questions are suitable for discussion because the conceptual objects expressed are by nature non-evident and thus speculations are likely to abound which is problematic since question 2 has not yet been clarified and also question 1 and 3 appear to be touched upon when it comes to speculations.

It seems that your interest lies in the area between philosophy and psychology and so does mine, even if we approach it differently. 'Who Am I?' was an issue which I thought about a lot after attending a workshop on it when I was 17. One important aspect may be that of authenticity of self. In social groups people adopt roles and personas which are often based on social expectations. In some ways, the construction of the self is based on social rules and meanings, which are given, as aspects of the social construction of reality. The idea of the social construction of reality draws upon sociological theory, and overlaps into social psychology. RD Laing spoke of the false self and the true self. The search to go beyond the false one and become the person who feels themselves to be is the recognised path of finding authenticity of self.

However, some people have argued that the self doesn't exist, a bit like Dennett's idea of the illusion of consciousness. The self may be elusive and rather than being an entity it is the weaved together narrative of subjectivity. It is bound up with consciousness as expressed in Descartes 'I think, therefore I am'. However, Descartes saw a split between mind and body, which is open to question, because it would be difficult to exist without both aspects.

The issue of cognition comes in here because it is bound up with consciousness. I know that you see thinking as a negative side-effect of the evolutionary development of human consciousness. It is possible to overthink, and, no doubt, I overthink, as evident in the amount of threads which I have written. However, without the ability to think there could be no problem solving. It is likely that meditation and mindfulness is important as a way of observing and as a way of watching what William James describes as 'the stream of consciousness'.

[JackDaydream]

What Are the Most Important Philosophy Questions?

As for the case that one seeks for long term happiness by ways of thinking, two questions are wise, importand, to raise: Which kind of thinking, when I take on think in that way, will lead to my long term happiness. Which kind of thinking, when I stop think in that way, will lead to my long term happiness.

Are the Questions as Important as Answers?

What does good householder think: Is there another way of gaining wisdom then to ask, seek for it?

As a side-effect: One's questions give much info about one's understanding.

It does seem that the questions one asks say a lot about a person's understanding. I know that the questions which I ask change in conjunction with my thinking. That makes seeing the questions of others as useful as a dialogue of the different voices.

The questions about wisdom and happiness are valued by many and often ideas of the Stoics are drawn upon. It may be that ancient philosophers thought more about this rather than questioning the nature of reality so much. It is possible to get so caught up in questions about objectivity, subjectivity and the nature of consciousness that the issues to do with living get lost amidst it all, because it is possible to go on endlessly about the questions surrounding consciousness and other issues of metaphysics. I do find that areas of metaphysics as being extremely interesting but prefer to look at the many branches of philosophy to see the connections systematically.

[Samana Johann]

What Are the Most Important Philosophy Questions?

As for the case that one seeks for long term happiness by ways of thinking, two questions are wise, importand, to raise: Which kind of thinking, when I take on think in that way, will lead to my long term happiness. Which kind of thinking, when I stop think in that way, will lead to my long term happiness.

Are the Questions as Important as Answers?

What does good householder think: Is there another way of gaining wisdom then to ask, seek for it?

As a side-effect: One's questions give much info about one's understanding.

It does seem that the questions one asks say a lot about a person's understanding. I know that the questions which I ask change in conjunction with my thinking. That makes seeing the questions of others as useful as a dialogue of the different voices.

The questions about wisdom and happiness are valued by many and often ideas of the Stoics are drawn upon. It may be that ancient philosophers thought more about this rather than questioning the nature of reality so much. It is possible to get so caught up in questions about objectivity, subjectivity and the nature of consciousness that the issues to do with living get lost amidst it all, because it is possible to go on endlessly about the questions surrounding consciousness and other issues of metaphysics. I do find that areas of metaphysics as being extremely interesting but prefer to look at the many branches of philosophy to see the connections systematically.

Wouldn't it be not more benefical if then laying aside ways of thinking which case stress, good householder?

[JackDaydream]

What Are the Most Important Philosophy Questions?

As for the case that one seeks for long term happiness by ways of thinking, two questions are wise, importand, to raise: Which kind of thinking, when I take on think in that way, will lead to my long term happiness. Which kind of thinking, when I stop think in that way, will lead to my long term happiness.

Are the Questions as Important as Answers?

What does good householder think: Is there another way of gaining wisdom then to ask, seek for it?

As a side-effect: One's questions give much info about one's understanding.

It does seem that the questions one asks say a lot about a person's understanding. I know that the questions which I ask change in conjunction with my thinking. That makes seeing the questions of others as useful as a dialogue of the different voices.

The questions about wisdom and happiness are valued by many and often ideas of the Stoics are drawn upon. It may be that ancient philosophers thought more about this rather than questioning the nature of reality so much. It is possible to get so caught up in questions about objectivity, subjectivity and the nature of consciousness that the issues to do with living get lost amidst it all, because it is possible to go on endlessly about the questions surrounding consciousness and other issues of metaphysics. I do find that areas of metaphysics as being extremely interesting but prefer to look at the many branches of philosophy to see the connections systematically.

Wouldn't it be not more benefical if then laying aside ways of thinking which case stress, good householder?

One particular approach which can be helpful is that of cognitive behavioral therapy. I have not partaken in this therapy but have read some books on it. I found it helpful for thinking about aspects of personal life with greater clarity and less rumination. However, the questions of philosophy still remain important to me and I admit that I have been preoccupied with the issue of life after death too much at times. I don't wish to spend so much of this life dwelling on that, as to avoid living this life, which may be the only one.

There is a danger of spending too much time dwelling on philosophy before living, as if there is a dress rehearsal in doing so, rather than jumping into the arena of life. The question is about how much contemplation and thought or action are useful, and how can the balance be juggled?

[Samana Johann]

As for the case that one seeks for long term happiness by ways of thinking, two questions are wise, importand, to raise: Which kind of thinking, when I take on think in that way, will lead to my long term happiness. Which kind of thinking, when I stop think in that way, will lead to my long term happiness.



What does good householder think: Is there another way of gaining wisdom then to ask, seek for it?

As a side-effect: One's questions give much info about one's understanding.

It does seem that the questions one asks say a lot about a person's understanding. I know that the questions which I ask change in conjunction with my thinking. That makes seeing the questions of others as useful as a dialogue of the different voices.

The questions about wisdom and happiness are valued by many and often ideas of the Stoics are drawn upon. It may be that ancient philosophers thought more about this rather than questioning the nature of reality so much. It is possible to get so caught up in questions about objectivity, subjectivity and the nature of consciousness that the issues to do with living get lost amidst it all, because it is possible to go on endlessly about the questions surrounding consciousness and other issues of metaphysics. I do find that areas of metaphysics as being extremely interesting but prefer to look at the many branches of philosophy to see the connections systematically.

Wouldn't it be not more benefical if then laying aside ways of thinking which case stress, good householder?

One particular approach which can be helpful is that of cognitive behavioral therapy. I have not partaken in this therapy but have read some books on it. I found it helpful for thinking about aspects of personal life with greater clarity and less rumination. However, the questions of philosophy still remain important to me and I admit that I have been preoccupied with the issue of life after death too much at times. I don't wish to spend so much of this life dwelling on that, as to avoid living this life, which may be the only one.

There is a danger of spending too much time dwelling on philosophy before living, as if there is a dress rehearsal in doing so, rather than jumping into the arena of life. The question is about how much contemplation and thought or action are useful, and how can the balance be juggled?

Again, as for long time happiness, it's not a question of amount of thinking but which thoughts are leading to liberation and which serve the opposite, good householder. So not: should I think or not, but 'what is wise to think'. ...as for what are important questions (for long term happiness).

[JackDaydream]

It does seem that the questions one asks say a lot about a person's understanding. I know that the questions which I ask change in conjunction with my thinking. That makes seeing the questions of others as useful as a dialogue of the different voices.

The questions about wisdom and happiness are valued by many and often ideas of the Stoics are drawn upon. It may be that ancient philosophers thought more about this rather than questioning the nature of reality so much. It is possible to get so caught up in questions about objectivity, subjectivity and the nature of consciousness that the issues to do with living get lost amidst it all, because it is possible to go on endlessly about the questions surrounding consciousness and other issues of metaphysics. I do find that areas of metaphysics as being extremely interesting but prefer to look at the many branches of philosophy to see the connections systematically.

Wouldn't it be not more benefical if then laying aside ways of thinking which case stress, good householder?

One particular approach which can be helpful is that of cognitive behavioral therapy. I have not partaken in this therapy but have read some books on it. I found it helpful for thinking about aspects of personal life with greater clarity and less rumination. However, the questions of philosophy still remain important to me and I admit that I have been preoccupied with the issue of life after death too much at times. I don't wish to spend so much of this life dwelling on that, as to avoid living this life, which may be the only one.

There is a danger of spending too much time dwelling on philosophy before living, as if there is a dress rehearsal in doing so, rather than jumping into the arena of life. The question is about how much contemplation and thought or action are useful, and how can the balance be juggled?

Again, as for long time happiness, it's not a question of amount of thinking but which thoughts are leading to liberation and which serve the opposite, good householder. So not: should I think or not, but 'what is wise to think'. ...as for what are important questions (for long term happiness).

It does depend on how much choice and control one has over one's thoughts. Generally, dwelling on the negative may be unhelpful and thinking maliciously of others may be damaging to oneself. However, in some ways the thoughts which flow into the mind are automatic and to fight them may be a defeated battle. On the other hand, there may be a way of steering the thoughts and which to focus on and cultivate. At times, I have felt overwhelmed by negativity. Some negative thoughts may be warnings of problems which need to be addressed. However, some can be more futile worry. The art may be about being the master of thought rather becoming drowned by it.

[Samana Johann]

Wouldn't it be not more benefical if then laying aside ways of thinking which case stress, good householder?

One particular approach which can be helpful is that of cognitive behavioral therapy. I have not partaken in this therapy but have read some books on it. I found it helpful for thinking about aspects of personal life with greater clarity and less rumination. However, the questions of philosophy still remain important to me and I admit that I have been preoccupied with the issue of life after death too much at times. I don't wish to spend so much of this life dwelling on that, as to avoid living this life, which may be the only one.

There is a danger of spending too much time dwelling on philosophy before living, as if there is a dress rehearsal in doing so, rather than jumping into the arena of life. The question is about how much contemplation and thought or action are useful, and how can the balance be juggled?

Again, as for long time happiness, it's not a question of amount of thinking but which thoughts are leading to liberation and which serve the opposite, good householder. So not: should I think or not, but 'what is wise to think'. ...as for what are important questions (for long term happiness).

It does depend on how much choice and control one has over one's thoughts. Generally, dwelling on the negative may be unhelpful and thinking maliciously of others may be damaging to oneself. However, in some ways the thoughts which flow into the mind are automatic and to fight them may be a defeated battle. On the other hand, there may be a way of steering the thoughts and which to focus on and cultivate. At times, I have felt overwhelmed by negativity. Some negative thoughts may be warnings of problems which need to be addressed. However, some can be more futile worry. The art may be about being the master of thought rather becoming drowned by it.

As told, if not asking useful questions, it's hardly possible to gain wisdom.

[JackDaydream]

One particular approach which can be helpful is that of cognitive behavioral therapy. I have not partaken in this therapy but have read some books on it. I found it helpful for thinking about aspects of personal life with greater clarity and less rumination. However, the questions of philosophy still remain important to me and I admit that I have been preoccupied with the issue of life after death too much at times. I don't wish to spend so much of this life dwelling on that, as to avoid living this life, which may be the only one.

There is a danger of spending too much time dwelling on philosophy before living, as if there is a dress rehearsal in doing so, rather than jumping into the arena of life. The question is about how much contemplation and thought or action are useful, and how can the balance be juggled?

Again, as for long time happiness, it's not a question of amount of thinking but which thoughts are leading to liberation and which serve the opposite, good householder. So not: should I think or not, but 'what is wise to think'. ...as for what are important questions (for long term happiness).

It does depend on how much choice and control one has over one's thoughts. Generally, dwelling on the negative may be unhelpful and thinking maliciously of others may be damaging to oneself. However, in some ways the thoughts which flow into the mind are automatic and to fight them may be a defeated battle. On the other hand, there may be a way of steering the thoughts and which to focus on and cultivate. At times, I have felt overwhelmed by negativity. Some negative thoughts may be warnings of problems which need to be addressed. However, some can be more futile worry. The art may be about being the master of thought rather becoming drowned by it.

As told, if not asking useful questions, it's hardly possible to gain wisdom.

On what basis are questions deemed useful or not, any by whom? Usefulness may lie in the idea of the beholder. Would it be on the basis of pragmatic considerations? It may be hard to eliminate the questions without knowing the consequences of asking them in the first instance. Asking questions is a way of brainstorming and may be essential to the creative process of philosophy, and it may be that those which lead to directions of purposeful exploration can be followed as part of the adventure, with the deadends being navigated as far as possible, in the snakes and ladders of philosophy.

[stevie]

What Are the Most Important Philosophy Questions and, Are the Questions as Important as Answers?

Three questions appear:
1. What is the self? (related questions might be: 'What/who am I?' or 'Does the self exist?')
2. What is cognition? (a related question might be: What is the relationship between cognition and the cognized?)
3. Are issues 1 and 2 connected? If so, how?

Of course these questions are only momentary snapshots and upon further thinking about the expressions they might appear to be inappropriate and better expressions might arise.
Also I don't think that these questions are suitable for discussion because the conceptual objects expressed are by nature non-evident and thus speculations are likely to abound which is problematic since question 2 has not yet been clarified and also question 1 and 3 appear to be touched upon when it comes to speculations.

It seems that your interest lies in the area between philosophy and psychology and so does mine, even if we approach it differently. 'Who Am I?' was an issue which I thought about a lot after attending a workshop on it when I was 17. One important aspect may be that of authenticity of self. In social groups people adopt roles and personas which are often based on social expectations. In some ways, the construction of the self is based on social rules and meanings, which are given, as aspects of the social construction of reality. The idea of the social construction of reality draws upon sociological theory, and overlaps into social psychology. RD Laing spoke of the false self and the true self. The search to go beyond the false one and become the person who feels themselves to be is the recognised path of finding authenticity of self.

However, some people have argued that the self doesn't exist, a bit like Dennett's idea of the illusion of consciousness. The self may be elusive and rather than being an entity it is the weaved together narrative of subjectivity. It is bound up with consciousness as expressed in Descartes 'I think, therefore I am'. However, Descartes saw a split between mind and body, which is open to question, because it would be difficult to exist without both aspects.

The issue of cognition comes in here because it is bound up with consciousness. I know that you see thinking as a negative side-effect of the evolutionary development of human consciousness. It is possible to overthink, and, no doubt, I overthink, as evident in the amount of threads which I have written. However, without the ability to think there could be no problem solving. It is likely that meditation and mindfulness is important as a way of observing and as a way of watching what William James describes as 'the stream of consciousness'.

i think your clinging to speculations is caused by your intended ignorance about issues 1-3.