did learning and determining whether there existed an objective reality that existed independently from your self play a big role in philosophy? or was stuff like external world skepticism and solipsism just hypothetical philosophies that realy didnt play a significant role in anything.what are your opinions on those 2 subjects? arent they pretty much disregarded as false and farfetched subjects?
2007-03-20 18:31:27 · 6 answers · asked by Anonymous in Arts & Humanities ➔ Philosophy
My major in college was philosophy. Finally, I dropped out in order to work on a writing project because the college I went to dropped Philosophy as a major.
During these two years I came to the conclusion that all I can ever know is that I exist. Ironically, I learned this little jewel in the first week of classes while studying Rene Descartes. All other theories relied upon some external knowledge and could not be known a priori.
It is hard sometimes talking to friends or family and explaining that the love I have for them is real even if I don't really know whether or not they exist. I know to most this must sound ridiculous but it is the plight of the philosopher.
My first paper was on Plato's myth of the cave. In it I described that the "real" world that the inhabitant of the cave was thrust into was not the world at all but another, larger cave. I think this sums it all up. Philosophy is not about the end result of a search for truth; it is the search itself and once you stop searching, you stop learning and that, to me, is unthinkable.
2007-03-20 20:50:07 · answer #1 · answered by Atheistphilosopher 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I took a philosophy class at WVU once, and the whole conceptualization was about proving arguments with tenets and things like that. If a leads to b, and b leads to c kind of stuff. Anyways we were supposed to learn specific arguments the way they were written on the board, and just regurgitate it when the questions were posed on a test. Well, I just wrote something like "this is a bunch of sophistry" or something to that effect. I must have of course offended the professor, because I pulled a D in that class, decimating my average.
Sorry for not answering your questions directly, but the subject reminded me of that funny story. Hope you find some humor in it, if not, guess you had to be there!
2007-03-21 01:44:18 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Metaphysical idealism (the view that the physical world is not real) is considered a legitimate theory, though few actually subscribe to it. I don't know what you mean by "played a big role in philosophy", but it was a possibility that had to be considered by anyone who developed a theory of metaphysics, and there still those who argue in favor if it.
I don't agree with the theory because it lacks evidence. The only real evidence that idealists can provide for their view is that it is possible that the physical world isn't real. However, we have a lot more reasons to believe that it is real (such as our perceptions). To expound all of the reasons on each side would take many pages, but suffice it to say that idealism slides a slippery slope from the possibility that the world isn't real, and therefore assumes that it isn't real. As far as burden of proof is concerned, the burden lies on idealism, and it fails. (George Berkeley offered a more complex defense of it by separating the different kinds of attributes of physical things, but his version of the theory fails as well on other grounds.)
2007-03-21 01:44:56 · answer #3 · answered by IQ 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I passed philosophy in college with a B+. All I learned was how to argue more productively.
Another thing about philosophy is that it teaches you about falseness, redherrings and fallacies so that you can see past them to know the truth of things.
Philosophy helped me see that psychology is wrong. When you think about it psychology tells you whats wrong with you. Now that you KNOW you have a problem, they don't tell you how to FIX IT!
The philosophical meaning of this is that you were better off before you went to the shrink. Therefore psychology is wrong.
2007-03-21 12:56:05 · answer #4 · answered by Lifted by God's grace 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't know if Yahoo is the correct forum to ask such a thought provoking question, but I do appreciate your cause for pondering such things. Perhaps you will single-handedly correct the downward spiral of our society's intelligence.
2007-03-21 02:09:08 · answer #5 · answered by Timmy Z 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I study philosophy because I have questions, not to answer them
2007-03-21 03:16:32 · answer #6 · answered by BANANA 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋