Some Thoughts on Philosophy

Philosophy is a field of study felt by some to be reserved for the intellectual and in fact to be somewhat superfluous, even unnecessary. Nothing could be further from the truth.

I am speaking specifically of Objectivism in this discussion which encompasses the study of the following: A) metaphysics or objective reality, B) epistemology  or reason, ethics and morality or rational self interest, C) politics or individual rights and capitalism, and D) aesthetics, or metaphysical value judgments as the most important in the broad field of study that is philosophy.

The separate fields, while being distinctly separate, at the same time are interconnected and if properly understood and applied result in a belief system that is consistent and non contradictory in its parts. However important this should be to an individual, most hard working people are so busy they either do not have the time to devote to the discipline and deep contemplation required of philosophy, or they simply do not care to.

Our schools do not help as they typically do not teach philosophy until one reaches college or the universities. Unfortunately the curriculum is generally biased towards the Platonist and Kantian models as opposed to the Aristotelian model. In short the curriculum in most institutions of higher is decidedly tilted. As a result the individual is not objectively exposed to all models and allowed to make up his or her own mind.

The pressure {in the universities} is to conform to the systematic viewpoint taught by Kantian and Platonist professors. Because of this fact we have relatively few individuals engaged in objective study of philosophy. Thus many {perhaps a majority} who graduate from our institutions of higher learning are biased and influenced in a way that is unhealthy for our society.

As our lives are impacted by our beliefs it is critically important for everyone to develop an understanding of the branches of philosophy and how they affect our reality based on our actions. Our actions should be grounded in something and not merely random movement through space and time. Equally as important we must think for ourselves and not be influenced or guided by what some would call mob mentality. Or more politely put, “groupthink”. In order for humans to accomplish this effectively they must be concerned with a consistent and grounded philosophy.

Many people tend to live their lives, and establish direction for it, on a case by case or day by day basis. This is to say they formulate decisions on issues that impact their lives in the reactive sense. When something occurs requiring their attention or response, they evaluate their immediate situation and determine a short term response to it. The decision is therefore based on immediate concerns and not on the possible long term ramifications of the decision on the individual’s life.
                                                                       
The purpose for, and ultimate benefit of, a study of philosophy is to equip a person with the knowledge and insights to determine value in their lives. Value based on rational self interest, and consistent and ethical standards by which to live their life. The discipline required to do this does not come easy, it requires hard work, thought, and a great deal of reason and introspection. In short it not only requires you to learn and make judgment and value decisions on concepts but to know yourself and what you really value and why.

The study of philosophy ultimately leads to a person developing a structure and code by which they live their lives. Rather than living their lives in a reactive cycle of sometimes confusing thoughts they will have developed the foundation upon which they proactively determine the direction they choose their lives to take. In other words it gives them a clear vision of their goals and aspirations for their life. The result is the individual achieving more of value, and attaining a level of happiness not possible otherwise.

As one accepts the premise that the study of philosophy will have life changing influence on them it becomes a driver in their more focused and productive life. While there are many worldly philosophers, and I hold Aristotle and Ayn Rand to be the most objective and therefore correct, it matters not in the end what philosophic body of thought one might personally hold as correct. It is far more important that the individual has determined a non contradictory philosophy, held to it, and lived their life by it.


And so in today's changing world, with many of the values held by our founding fathers and the  truly great leaders {past} of our nation almost forgotten, lets turn to philosophy to find our way out of the current crises our nation is facing.

Comments

  1. there is the rub, my friend. we as a nation was founded upon a philosophy but have given up on it and turned to another discipline as a guide. that discipline being called sociology. and continuing to abide by this discipline has led us and is leading us down the path to socialism.

    the constitution, itself, is viewed as a social contract rather than a political contract meaning that it is subject to change with the changes of a society rather than subject to change based upon agreement of the parties involved.

    ReplyDelete
  2. That's a load of excrement Griper. Learn some history and the Constitution.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Griper - You make a valid point with respect to the change in societal evolution is the US. The philosophical thought (the enlightenment) this nation was founded on now longer is discussed.

    Foxwood - Your observation relative to the institutionalized indoctrination of our children in socializes and statist thought is so true.

    The Griper's observation is also correct. I believe he was referring to the modern day interpretation of our Constitution as being a living and breathing document. It seems the majority of America today believes this the case.

    I can't speak for the Griper, therefor I may be wrong, but I believe he see the departure from a strict constructionist understanding of our Constitution as part of the problem.

    Griper - If my interpretation is not correct please forgive me.

    ReplyDelete
  4. no apolgies necessary, my friend. the liberal interpretation of the Constitution eliminates a very important idea of law, the idea of "precedence". without it, there is no consistency of interpretation of the law. it no longer becomes a contract based upon reason but one based upon the feelings at any given time.

    Sandra Day O'Conner exemplified this best when she said that what was Constitutional today may not be Constitutional in ten years in the case against the University of Michigan a few years back. and it won't be because of an error on the part of the Supreme Court but from a change in feelings in society.

    that is a perfect example of the use of the discipline of sociology rather than the discipline of philosophy.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Well put and a great example with the reference to Justice O'Connor.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

RN USA is a No Judgement Zone (to steal from Planet Fitness), so please, No Judgement of others. We reserve the right to delete any such comment immediately upon detection.

All views are welcome. As long as the comment is on topic and respectful of others.



Top Posts

As the Liberal/Progressive Media and Blogosphere Attempt To Destroy Governor Chris Christie...

And The Carnage Continues...

Unspeakable Evil...

Recommended Reading, Thomas Piketty’s best-selling new book, “Capital in the Twenty-First Century”...

Our Biggest Creditor {China} Tells Us "The good old days of borrowing are over"

On the Zimmerman Trial amd Outcome...