|
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Adam asked:
|
 |
I know this is a general statement, but what is the point of philosophy?
|
 |
============
|
 |
"To think better in order to live better," as the French philosopher Andre Comte-Sponville puts it in his
philosophical dictionary. (That's what I believe the point of philosophy should be, anyway. One can
also use, and many people do use, philosophy as a tool to allow one's vices to flourish more freely
and in subtler forms. But fortunately philosophy is simultaneously a tool to counter such uses of
itself.)
|
 |
T. P. Uschanov
|
 |
Research Assistant
|
 |
Department of Philosophy
|
 |
University of Helsinki
|
 |
Generally, the "point" of philosophy is the achievement of a coherent and experientially adequate
understanding of a broad range of fundamental matters such as knowledge, existence, and value.
The impetus that moved you to ask your question is what moves philosophy. It is the pure desire to
know the truth. This desire competes daily with other desires, but left to itself it would not rest until
satisfied by knowledge of everything about everything. The pure desire to know distinguishes you as
a human questor, which you exemplified by asking your question. Whether there is a "point" to
fulfilling one's nature is a question for another day.
|
 |
One superficial difference between a simple question that anyone may ask (e.g., "What is
knowledge?," "Is there a God?," or "What ought I do with my life?") and a philosophical question is
endurance: the philosopher pursues simple questions long past the point at which the
non-philosopher loses interest or gives up. But more than intellectual stamina is involved. The
philosopher's interest encompasses every area of experience of which he or she is aware and
demands that provisional answers hang together logically. If they are lacking either in experiential
adequacy or mutual coherence, the philosopher must modify or abandon at least one of them.
|
 |
Tony Flood
|
 |
94
|
|