Robert asked:

Philosophers throughout history have always been quintessence of what we would refer to as
student. They sometimes are influenced by other minds when forming a philosophical opinion. Plato
might have been influenced by the Buddha or Confucius, Jesus by so called prophets, Mohammed by
Jesus and the Torah and so on and so on. It's like a philosophical pyramid. It perplexes me when so
many "students of philosophy" can have totally different views on a single issue.

Hence my question.....has there been any study as to how philosophy can be detrimental to the
harmony of this planet? It seems to me that any new philosophical thought can alter the status quo
and be disruptive among this species. Couple that thought with the present political and economic
climate around the world, philosophy seems to be outright dangerous. Western...middle eastern and
eastern cultures dictate a philosophy that is suited for that part of the world. It seems to me
philosophy has lost its purity as a science or even as a discipline. May I have your views on this?

============

I suspect you will get more than one answer to your question; and it occurred to me that possibly one
slightly 'offbeat' way of responding would be to invite you to ponder the presuppositions to which your
questions gives voice.

For example: "The harmony of this planet." Are you sure there is such a thing? Isn't harmony a
human concept? Of course it is; and when you use the phrase "harmony of the earth", you probably
mean some kind of balance between us and nature that is not destructive to either. But perhaps you
might entertain the possibility that this supposed harmony is also a human prejudice — an extremely
rare manifestation in the real world and therefore all the more desired and hoped for. For to begin
with, harmony implies disharmony; it implies disparate elements coming together and producinga
concordance of co-existence. But altogether there is more conflict in the world, much more: and this
could positively invite you to consider whether those 'conflict situations' to which you allude with such
worry may, in fact, comprise the preconditions of harmony?I put it to you as a debating point that the
concept of 'harmony' which is promoted by so many thinkers has an element of sterilityabout it.
Harmony is not a natural state of being and the complexity which, for example, rules life would
collapse to an inert state not much different from the 'peace' enjoyed by a rock if harmony were the
default condition.

So I'm suggesting to you that you put a perspective on your beliefs. Harmony tends to be a 'loaded'
term, often accepted without examination as to what it purports; and thus "the present political and
economic climate", which seems disastrously unbalanced to you, strikes you as a dangerous
problem; but you need do no more than dip into any history book to find the sages of every age and
culture saying the same thing. There is an old adage, whose source I can't remember now, but its
meaning was effectively: we strive throughout our lives mightily to achieve a secure basis for our
peace, happiness and contentment, and one day, in our dotage, we achieve it and find little
satisfaction in it. It is then, when we look back upon the course of our struggles, that we realise that
our true happiness and contentment were in the doing, not in the relaxing, and that the very meaning
of it all revolved around this question-and-answer game with society, nature, our own inner strivings
and the perpetual need to create-and-resolve conflict situations.

In other words, I'm really giving the question back to you with a counter-question: is harmony perhaps
something greater than ourselves, a phenomenon that works itself out through conflict over long
stretches of time, but with the telosof earth persistently in the balance: and we are too small and
unaware, that our conflicts are in the service of the greater "harmony of this planet." After all, allowing
for a moment that harmony equates with eco-balance; it is a pretty plain conclusion that if we humans
manage to untip this balance sufficiently, we'll go down. The earth will not support a rapacious
creature like homo sapiens for long if our greed enters the stage of runaway calamity: for if we
deplete the resources available to other life forms, we do the same to ours.

Finally you wonder whether philosophy has lost its purity. I hope you realise, even from the little I've
just said, that this is again a terribly prejudicial notion. Philosophy is not a "something" made of
material with changing degrees of purity. It is a human pursuit, and philosophy is exactly as 'pure' or
otherwise, as the person pursuing it. Philosophy is about reason, knowledge and truth, and all these
must changeas we go along, not because we are 'losing' harmony or purity, but because harmony in
the human domain is a dynamic state of interplay between minds and amenable to growth. There
have been eras in the history of mankind where just one philosophy prevailed, and few would go
along with the suggestion that these eras were notable either for their peace and harmony or
especially conducive to the maintenance of human values. So the best hope for us, I think, is that the
disharmony which you perceive is 'value-driven' and will allow something good to come out of it. And
this is a play in which you too, have a role to play.

Jürgen Lawrenz

Sydney