Is Philosophy Still Relevant?

[Infected Mushroom]

Should philosophy still be something to be studied in college?

I mean, it doesn't seem terribly useful besides being something some people might chat about in their spare time over tea.

It seems that philosophy is at a dead end anyways. Nowadays it seems to me philosophers just keep thinking of slightly different ways to say the same post-modern stuff (there is no Truth, there is nothing objective). None of it seems very applicable to real life.

There isn't much ''progress'' in philosophy. In other disciplines you can measure progress. For example, in science we invent bigger bombs, more medicines, more communication etc. In history we unearth more about the past, we accumulate objective knowledge so we can better build our world in the future. But in philosophy? What exactly is contributed besides highly abstract things that can't be proven one way or another?

It seems to me that philosophy should no longer be taught in college. People are always welcome to write and sell books about their own personal outlooks on life but I don't understand why we need academics to ''study'' it (how can you ''study'' something that isn't about accumulating objective knowledge or improving technology/actual skills?).

Another thing that vexes me about modern philosophy is how so many of the authors seem intent on frustrating the readers by writing books that are completely incomprehensible. Yes, ''how artistic'' and ''how hip'' is it to demonstrate that there is no Truth by writing a book on the topic that is purposefully incomprehensible and loaded with non-existent words. Any reason it needed to be this bad? I'm sorry but this isn't scholarship to me. Its just quirky, self-conscious publicity-seeking. Unfortunately I feel this is pretty much the norm with much of the modern academia of philosophy. Just pick up a book by Boudrillard or Deleuze and Guattari and you'll see the perfect examples for what I'm talking about. Intentionally over-convoluted, incomprehensible, ''academic'' stuff designed to illustrate a point that can't be proven (there is no Truth).

What do you think? Should philosophy still be taught in college? Do you think philosophy has hit a post-modernist dead end? Is it even
useful?

[Aggicificicerous]

Is being able to think useful? I would say so.

[Sacara]

Is being able to think useful? I would say so.

^^ Summed up my thoughts.

[Benuty]

I'd rather not live on a planet that lacked critical thinking, and lazed around like a bunch of dullards in Fahrenheit 451.

[Conserative Morality]

Is being able to think useful? I would say so.

All that counts are objective measurements. Can you measure thinking? No? Who cares, then?

[Lavan Tiri]

Unlike your opinions, yes.

[Infected Mushroom]

I'd rather not live on a planet that lacked critical thinking, and lazed around like a bunch of dullards in Fahrenheit 451.

i don't think removing the formal study of philosophy is going to eliminate humanity's capacity for creative and critical thought.

Creative and critical thought are among the avenues to personal success in this world; and some of us will always use those avenues (especially those who are really ambitious/well-predisposed to such thinking).

And in this day and age... Philosophy as Creative?

They've been saying the same post-modernist stuff over and over and over again for the past few decades...

[The Fascist American Empire]

I agree with all but two people on this thread. Philosophy is the study of truth. It teaches us how to think critically and how to question. Without the Ancient Greek philosophers, who is to say hat we would be as technologically advanced today as we are. Who is to say that science as we know it would even exist?

[Grand Britannia]

Philosophy is interesting and allows you to open your mind so I don't see why the need to remove it.

[Lavan Tiri]

I'd rather not live on a planet that lacked critical thinking, and lazed around like a bunch of dullards in Fahrenheit 451.

i don't think removing the formal study of philosophy is going to eliminate humanity's capacity for creative and critical thought.

Creative and critical thought are among the avenues to personal success in this world; and some of us will always use those avenues (especially those who are really ambitious/well-predisposed to such thinking).

Yes, but philosophy is more than that. It's entire purpose is to make people think deely, and ponder the world. Not every skill needs to be applicable. I speak fluent Esperanto. Is this an actual skill? Hell no. Is it interesting? Hella.

[Lalaki]

Philosophy is very relevant in today's world. It teaches us the meaning(s) of life, as defined by some of the most intelligent people ever to live.

[Infected Mushroom]

Philosophy is interesting and allows you to open your mind so I don't see why the need to remove it.

you can't measure progress in philosophy. It isn't about accumulating actual facts, improving technology, or improving concrete human skills.

Should educational institutions continue to employ large numbers of academics devoted to abstract speculation about the non-objective (and I would argue, they have largely become a priestly class for the post-modern There Is No Truth orthodoxy)?

I believe the law, anthropology, psychology etc are all more productive ways of opening up the mind while still equipping the population with real, practical on the ground skills (or at least the ability to improve the sum total of human knowledge by gathering objective facts).

[Conserative Morality]

you can't measure progress in philosophy. It isn't about accumulating actual facts, improving technology, or improving concrete human skills.

Should educational institutions continue to employ large numbers of academics devoted to abstract speculation about the non-objective (and I would argue, they have largely become a priestly class for the post-modern There Is No Truth orthodoxy)?

I believe the law, anthropology, psychology etc are all more productive ways of opening up the mind while still equipping the population with real, practical on the ground skills (or at least the ability to improve the sum total of human knowledge by gathering objective facts).

So what you're saying is that your philosophy of utilitarian education should be forced upon the nation without regard for opposing views?

Maybe you should take a few more philosophy courses.

[Infected Mushroom]

i don't think removing the formal study of philosophy is going to eliminate humanity's capacity for creative and critical thought.

Creative and critical thought are among the avenues to personal success in this world; and some of us will always use those avenues (especially those who are really ambitious/well-predisposed to such thinking).

Yes, but philosophy is more than that. It's entire purpose is to make people think deely, and ponder the world. Not every skill needs to be applicable. I speak fluent Esperanto. Is this an actual skill? Hell no. Is it interesting? Hella.

learning Spanish is a concrete and applicable skill.

Millions of people speak Spanish; its definitely useful.

I'm not sure why you need to study philosophy per say to think deeply and ponder the world. It seems like an insufficient justification because I could say that studying law, sociology, political science, or psychology also achieve the same thing (BUT they actually impart concrete knowledge, concrete skills specific to their discipline and applicable to this world).

[Lavan Tiri]

Yes, but philosophy is more than that. It's entire purpose is to make people think deely, and ponder the world. Not every skill needs to be applicable. I speak fluent Esperanto. Is this an actual skill? Hell no. Is it interesting? Hella.

learning Spanish is a concrete and applicable skill.

Millions of people speak Spanish; its definitely useful.

I'm not sure why you need to study philosophy per say to think deeply and ponder the world. It seems like an insufficient justification because I could say that studying law, sociology, political science, or psychology also achieve the same thing (BUT they actually impart concrete knowledge, concrete skills specific to their discipline and applicable to this world).

*sighs* Not Espanol. Esperanto.

[Infected Mushroom]

learning Spanish is a concrete and applicable skill.

Millions of people speak Spanish; its definitely useful.

I'm not sure why you need to study philosophy per say to think deeply and ponder the world. It seems like an insufficient justification because I could say that studying law, sociology, political science, or psychology also achieve the same thing (BUT they actually impart concrete knowledge, concrete skills specific to their discipline and applicable to this world).

*sighs* Not Espanol. Esperanto.

i don't know what that is...

[Divergia]

Philosophy is interesting and allows you to open your mind so I don't see why the need to remove it.

you can't measure progress in philosophy. It isn't about accumulating actual facts, improving technology, or improving concrete human skills.

Should educational institutions continue to employ large numbers of academics devoted to abstract speculation about the non-objective (and I would argue, they have largely become a priestly class for the post-modern There Is No Truth orthodoxy)?

I believe the law, anthropology, psychology etc are all more productive ways of opening up the mind while still equipping the population with real, practical on the ground skills (or at least the ability to improve the sum total of human knowledge by gathering objective facts).

So your saying we shouldn't fund Philosophy because it isn't Sociology?

[Bering]

*sighs* Not Espanol. Esperanto.

i don't know what that is...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Esperanto

[KAS SRD]

*sighs* Not Espanol. Esperanto.

i don't know what that is...

It's an artificial language used for the sole purpose of communicating over the Internet by a few people.

[Conserative Morality]

i don't know what that is...

It's an artificial language used for the sole purpose of communicating over the Internet by a few people.

Esperanto predates the internet.

[Infected Mushroom]

i don't know what that is...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Esperanto

ok but is there a degree in Esperanto?

At any rate, I suspect since it actually does improve your communication (and some 100,000 people speak it) its still more useful than philosophy I suspect.

The point is that the only thing philosophy seems to do is allow you to think ''critically'' (I question this assumption because nowadays it seems to be more about enforcing the There Is No Truth dogma that is practically the antithesis of emphasizing critical thought)... but even IF we went with the assumption that it DOES enforce critical thought, it should need an additional justification.

Because as I say, one can claim that their critical thinking skill is encouraged/explored by studying other disciplines be it psychology or political science for example... while claiming additional discipline-specific benefits that are directly translatable into the real world (ex gathering data related to politics and running statistical tests, performing experiments etc). Philosophy is sorely lacking in this. If the only thing it can claim to do is something pretty much any other discipline can impart, then I find its existence unjustifiable as an academic discipline.

Of course, if you want to write and sell books about your outlook on life and people love your books, that's cool by me. But do schools really need to employ academics to study the absence of Truth?

[Geilinor]

Is being able to think useful? I would say so.

All that counts are objective measurements. Can you measure thinking? No? Who cares, then?

You don't care about thinking? You're doing it right now.

[Vladovaskia]

I actually see where you're coming from, for once, and partially agree. Philosophy can lead to highly critical thinking, which can in turn be put forth for any discipline. Now, as for majoring in philosophy? lol. Philosophy plays a major role in film, literature, music, and basically all of everyday life. However, it is not something that one should study alone. Or else we end up with those kids who *cough*I'm speaking from a personal encounter here*cough* have a bookshelf full of books in French, claim they've read and fully understand them, but then admit they can't speak or read French. I have a bookshelf full of books. They're in English. One is in Spanish. Have I read them all? No. Am I going to try to? Eventually. Have I read the Spanish one? I'm working on it.

[Infected Mushroom]

All that counts are objective measurements. Can you measure thinking? No? Who cares, then?

You don't care about thinking? You're doing it right now.

i find it strange that many people equate something as basic and broad as ''thinking'' with a single very esoteric academic discipline.

I'm sure academics from the other disciplines would be frowning right now if they heard these implications...

[Vazdaria]

Of course its still relevant?