What "is" a Philosopher? And do We Really Need Them?
I am still very new to steemit, but so far I have been impressed by the level of civility among you steemers. Moreover, you do so without losing that critical edge that makes the world that much more interesting. That is becoming rare these days, though this is not surprising, as philosophy has faded into the background as well. That is not the first time this has happened in human history, and I doubt it will be the last. Nevertheless, as a "philosopher" I feel it almost my duty to ask what, if anything, can be done to correct our forgetfulness? Or even if we should care at all? I am testing the waters here, so to speak, to see what if any interest there is in discussing such things here on steemit. If so I'll be stoked! I bet we could have some killer conversations here. So what is a philosopher?
I would say there are three types of philosophers: academic, professional, and amateur. Most academic philosophers are professional as well, as they usually get paid to research philosophy; though it is not unheard of to find academic amateur philosophers lurking the libraries and philosophy chat rooms. Point being, the difference between professional and amateur in terms of a philosopher says nothing about said philosophers capacities/intelligence. Quite the opposite perhaps, for one to study philosophy without getting paid is truly honorable in my humble opinion. That said, I get paid. I also do research partially funded through my position, though I am an academic on the fringe as I teach at a community college and not an actual research institution. I'm like a no man in no man's land.
Does this make me an expert in philosophy? I guess I don't know what that means? If by expert one means knowing "everything" about philosophy, not only would I NOT claim to be an expert, I would argue no such beast exists. But if by expert one means those with the most experience/education, then perhaps there is something to that; but I would again remind us that philosophy can be slippery, and even here we threaten to push beyond our limits. Interestingly, in asking the question of what the philosopher "is", we have more or less asked the meaning of philosophy as such. Philo-sophia, roughly translated as the "love" of wisdom, better translated as the loving "friend" of wisdom. Though now I am wondering what wisdom "is", and what it would mean to be a "friend" to it? Or should we banish wisdom to the abyss and embrace some strange objectivism and/or solipsism?
But perhaps that should be the subject of the next story . . . I mean, question. Let's see how far this gets us . . .
Great post! One of my main interests in the steemit community is the platform which I think it provides for philosophy; sort of the ultimate modern day square of Athens! I studied philosophy in college and grew disillusioned in the end because of I felt it became more about the dogma of "who said what" than anything else.
I think we generally use the term philosopher to define someone who is able to make a living out of the study of philosophy, however personally, I would say that a philosopher is anybody that asks and contemplates the larger questions there are in life and discusses it with others.
Really anybody who pursues knowledge, in whatever field, is a sort of philosopher (hence the use of PHD 'Doctor of Philosophy' in all different subjects). While that may seem sort of silly now, the advancements of the sciences really developed from the very philosophical questions of why and how.
Thanks shadow. And I agree, what drew me to steemit was the format for doing just what you suggest; the public square. What worries me, however, is how philosophy has come to mean "mere opinion" to many people; and that just does not seem right? Which is why I suppose Plato wanted to talk about the difference between knowledge and opinion. I teach Intro every year, and at the end of the course we are still asking that question. Round and round we go . . .
Ultimately I think we are confined to the subjective nature of the human condition. You may make an objective claim, and you may be right, but you can never be certain of it, let alone prove it to another. That's why there are so many differing philosophies, opinions, religions, etc.
So I should point out that grammatically there has never been a plural form of philosophy, until quite recently. Philosophia cannot be plural in attic Greek, its origin, as the love of wisdom always already embodied the goddess of wisdom; Sophia. Sophia cannot be plural, i.e., there is only one Sophia.
This carried over into Latin as well, and even as philosophy was divorced from the belief in the goddess per se, the idea that wisdom is "one" remained well into the rise of Existentialism. As early as the late 90's/turn of the Century, most spell checks would not allow for the term philosophies, it would be flagged as misspelled; something I see the spell check here does not do. There ya have it. Still, what happened? When did the goddess get torn asunder?
i just Realized there are kinds of Philosophers.
Are you suggesting all philosophers are the same? Is philosophy mere opinion?
Main question of western philosophy woul be 'How everything works?'.
Main question of eastern philosophy would be 'Who am i?'.
Common to all philosophy is enquiry.
Yet...ripening of Wisdom and Understanding is a process and doesn't depend only on inquiry or intelectual analisys although that being helpful, but also on Grace.
Not sure I would agree, considering the oracle at Delphi had "Know thy Self" carved above the entrance to the cave and Buddha was famous for his doctrine of anatman.