For the love of wisdom... (please no spam)

[Cuchulain82]

This is partially in response to the recent Darth Malak thread. The discussion became very philosophical (in the technical sense) and also very... um... heated. In an effort to understand other SYMers a little better, would people please reply to the poll? I want to get a better grasp if anyone here really likes philosophy- talking about philosophers, works, schools, etc.

I really like philosophy, but I don't usually mention it explicitly because I don't think other people want to read about it, and I don't want to come across as a pontificating buffoon. However, I think I may have already crossed that line, so now I would like to know what people think.

Please reply if you have something to say, or if not, just push the button. Please don't spam.

(it's my poll, so I'm not gonna vote- my opinion is pretty obvious at this point anyway)

[CM]

Depends what the subject is and if it is grounded in reality or not. If you are gonna go completely abstract on a subject i just get bored and walk away. I need to discuss philiosphy in the context of actions taken today on the ground around the world. But if you are gonna go all decartes and or start discussing stuff like to be or not to be that is the question, i will commit murder

Philiosphy is good fun and can be rather interesting and enjoyable, if you have the right environment like SYM.

[dragon wench]

I really enjoy philosophy. Where SYM discussions are concerned, I respond to it in much the same that I do towards the political or more academic types of threads.
Which is to say, I almost always read such discussions but I do not always reply. It depends on my mood and what is going on in my life. If I am dealing with all kinds of issues or events I often don't have the mental and/or emotional energy to get involved in really heavy discussions, especially if they become quite acrimonious, or if egos run over the top.

Also, as CM stated, I'm more likely to reply if the subject in question is relavant to a particular, on the ground, ethical issue. For example, the discussion of the Terri Shiavo case in relationship to the ethics of Euthanasia. If philosophy discussions are entirely in the realm of the abstract, I'm somewhat less inclined to become involved. This is personal though; during my time in academia I encountered many people who were utterly unable to link the intellectual with the everyday, and quite often they really didn't care either. For example, I once knew somebody who enjoyed going on at length about Marxist theory versus Feminist theory, yet they had no interest at all in the very real social conditions that give rise to such theoretical debate in the first place....

Personally, I think discussions about philosophy fit right into SYM, the archives are full of such threads. It is this, amongst other things, that distinguishes SYM/GB from most gaming forums I've visited and were this not the case I wouldn't have continued to return

[C Elegans]

I enjoy philosophy. By that I mean I enjoy the subject philosophy, not every quasi-philosophical discussion that teenagers in all times and cultures like to have about issues such as "do we really exist", "is the colour red the same for you as for me", etc. Don't misunderstand this as arrogance, I used to have such discussions with my friends when I was a teenager too and I think it's part of healthy development, but it is pretty useless and unconstructive in the long run.

I am interested in philosophy and philosophical questions when they are applicable to events in the objective reality (yes I am a realist). I don't enjoy philosophy as a mindgame.

Let me also add that I completly agree with Fable regarding popular simplifications of topics that could be learned quite easily if we had an educational system that started to do it at an early age. Maths is not easier than logics, still every college student can perform a third grade equation or handle integrals and derivates. If philosophy was taught half as extensive as maths, Kant's magnus opus wouldn't be so difficult to read. In any case - I certainly don't think it's necessary for kids to read Kant or Hegel in original in order to use philosophy as a helpful tool for analysis, reasoning and conclusion drawing. On the other hand, I don't think such extremely popularised and simplified ways to depict philosophical issues as "Matrix" or "Star Wars" lead to anything stimulating and developing either. In my opionion the erranous idea that everything needs to be simplified to Hollywood- and reality show level, is one of the most destructive ideas in current Western society because it removes a large part of the population from access to real information and real knowledge. Political and social analysts have long said that Western society is developing into a new class society where access to information and knowledge is the segregatubg factor, not money. This is unfortunately getting increasingly true.

[VonDondu]

I have a bachelor's degree in Philosophy. As Steven Martin once said, "You forget most of what you learned in college… but you remember just enough of what they taught you in philosophy to screw you up for the rest of your life.”

If you're a dilettante, feel free to dabble in philosophy all you like. But if you want to get serious about studying it, buy life insurance. Lots of it.

[frogus23]

I enjoy philosophy, and I enjoy philosophy as a mindgame and recognise that many times it cannot help but be such.

The uselessness of philosophy is a misunderstanding of philosophy's use, and I think that philosophy's use is more destructive than constructive, hence many people's negative image of it. It destroys naivety, acceptance of dogmas, cloudiness of thinking, and willingness to accept hollow cliches such as 'common sense' as real ideas.

Grappling with problems which are clearly unrealistic, overly schematised, or simplified into arbitrary concepts (the 'glass castles' that philosophers so often build) is not a futile exercise. It teaches one to recognise glass castles, absurdities, hollow concepts, dogmas and cliches in 'real life' where they are dangerous, in politics, in people's relationships and so on.

So, although most of the time philosophical discussions yield no answers, and are largely irrelevent to real life, the skill which one develops by thinking very purposefully about nonsense can be applied to real issues with real benefits. As pushing against a mountain is an apparently pointless activity, but in fact makes one stronger and better able to acheive pointful tasks.

[Macleod1701]

I'm fairly indifferent towards philosophy and generally find it dull, however I wouldn't consider myself naive, and frequently recognise how absurd most of life is. Mostly it's probably just that I don't have the time to argue over things that don't really achieve anything in the end.

[Cuchulain82]

Thanks for posting everyone, and voting. Anyone who hasn't please don't hesitate to do so. I guess that I always thought no one would ever read a 5,000 word reply about Kant, rhetoric, sophism, Nietzsche, or other philosophical stuff. Now I know that there is a pool of 16 potential readers (and counting)- that's probably more people than actually finish assigned reading in any given philosophy class!

[QUOTE=VonDondu]I have a bachelor's degree in Philosophy...If you're a dilettante, feel free to dabble in philosophy all you like. But if you want to get serious about studying it, buy life insurance. Lots of it. [/QUOTE]
Imagine... a bachelor's degree in philosophy causing problems? Necessitating life insurance? Who would have thought that would be the case?