[dpweb]

It says more about our society that the person who chooses to study philosophy. Making more money is valuable and not making much is looked down upon. But, how happy are we? What philosophy can do is expand your mind beyond what society has told you. Consider these questions in looking at your existence,

What can I know? What must I do? What is man? What is God?

They're not to be scoffed at, waved away with a dismissive.. well how much do you make? You don't need much to live you'll find when you get into those questions in your life instead of how much more money can I make to buy stuff I don't need.

[argonaut]

You are conflating "philosophizing" with "the modern academic study of philosophy." To most people, the second has nothing to do with the first.

Your grandparents, uncles, and aunts have better answers to those questions. Maybe a two semester survey of the history of philosophy and reading the great works to hear some different perspectives. Neither of these involve a full course of study in philosophy.

[pmoriarty]

This kind of dismissive, condescending attitude towards philosophical concerns which are clearly important to a lot if not most people is one of the main things that really ticks me off about some contemporary analytic philosophers, and especially their predecessors, the logical positivists.

They would have the subjects they have anointed be the only True Philosophy, and anything else as mere "philosophizing". But this "philosophizing" has been largely what philosophy was for its entire existence. It's almost the definition of philosophy.

The grandparent poster mentioned four questions: "What can I know? What must I do? What is man? What is God?"

The first two are epistomological and ethical questions, and it's not like either epistemology or ethics have gotten short shrift from analytics, which currently dominate academia. Some analytics aren't interested in those questions, but that doesn't mean they're not philosophical questions or that they're "meaningless" (a favorite dismissive tactic of the logical positivists).

The last two questions could arguably have to do with ontology and metaphysics: not analytic favorites by any stretch of the imagination, but certainly traditionally considered philosophy. You don't need to go to your anunts or uncles to get a bit of "folk philosophy" (yet another dismissive term from some other analytics) but look to thousands of years of philosophical literature on the subject, or attend school in a non-analytic philosophy department (good luck with that in English-speaking countries, which are dominated by analytics). But even analytics have on occasion tackled ontological issues (see the more recent attention to Heidegger from some of them as an example).

The last question is really on shakiest ground as far as philosophy goes. It could arguably be a theological question, but again, theology is an actual academic discipline and you don't have to settle for survey of the opinions of the average person on the street, but actually go to a university and study it, even if it'll be outside a philosophy department. But there has been plenty of philosophy in history which has engaged in theological concerns in some fashion (some common examples being the existence of God, and the problem of evil). It's just not fashionable to consider those questions in academia these days, but again, that doesn't make them non-philosophical.

[argonaut]

You're not making a coherent argument. It seems we agree?

[PavlovsCat]

> You are conflating "philosophizing" with "the modern academic study of philosophy."

For me that's like having sex compared to studying porn, or like walking around the block instead of watching sports. You can belittle it while I enjoy its fruits.

[argonaut]

Who said I was belittling it? Your words not mine.

If anything I was belittling the academic study of philosophy.

[gbog]

The philosophy of the origins in the West and in the East did not care even a little bit about "man" or "God". It did care a lot about how to live together. It was mostly about morals and politics. I think today philosophy has sunk in metaphysics, and it is a shame because we need more than ever to learn how to live together.

[nickpsecurity]

I agree with argonaut. I did have a philosophy class in college. However, most of my time on it was spent reading books, discussing such subjects with people of many views, looking at real-world events to see which philosophies hold up against them, doing thought experiments, and so on.

I bet this taught me way more than an academic program with a narrow focus run by one or more people probably within same or similar political leanings. Plus, I learned business and tech skills. :)