At the end of our discussion today I broached the topic of preparedness, talking with them a little bit about why they think "now" (being in college, growing as a young adult, etc) is the right time to read philosophy. They
February 6, 2007
Some Problems with Philosophy: Post Script
Today we effectively concluded the first "unit" in my intro class, which had as its central focus an exploration of the attitude of philosophy. Paraphrasing Bertrand Russell, we decided that philosophy done well (and rightly oriented) does four things: (1) it adds to our store of knowledge and fills out our education, (2) it examines familiar things in an unfamiliar light, (3) it questions and challenges tradition, and (4) it provides -- somehow -- ways of coping with our everyday experience. I've asked them to write a short paper indicating which of the following thinkers they think best exemplifies the philosophical attitude: Thales, Socrates, Plato, Kierkegaard, or Nietzsche. The conversation over the last two weeks has been really exceptional in this class -- at 7:00am! -- so we've really been able to explore these ideas using the Pojman text. I'm really looking forward to their written responses.
At the end of our discussion today I broached the topic of preparedness, talking with them a little bit about why they think "now" (being in college, growing as a young adult, etc) is the right time to read philosophy. Theyreally surprised me with their answers, which were all along the lines of their minds being ready to accept the abstract nature of these ideas, their force and the lens philosophy provides to reorganize their experience. What struck me was first of all, how frank they were in recognizing the way philosophy fits with and for them. I couldn't help but think of the poverty of my assessment below, in the sense that the way I've viewed this "unpreparedness" is a half-empty proposition. They come at the class feeling intellectually prepared -- like now is the time when philosophy will make sense. I've made an inverted assumption about my students, and today I'm pleasantly surprised.
At the end of our discussion today I broached the topic of preparedness, talking with them a little bit about why they think "now" (being in college, growing as a young adult, etc) is the right time to read philosophy. They
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Using Russell's four points; I think I'd classify the thinkers you mentioned in this way:
(1): Plato
(2): Kierkegaard, Nietzsche, Thales, Plato
(3): Kierkegaard, Nietzsche, Socrates
(4): Kierkegaard, Nietzsche
One way or another, Kierkegaard and Nietzsche fulfills three of Russell's four points.
(1): But, they fail in (1), because their philosophical project is to question our entire foundation of knowledge. So does Socrates, the man who knows that he knows nothing, and Thales' idea that everything is made of water isn't very informative, leaving only Plato.
(2): Thales' water theory is still examining familiar things in an unfamiliar light. The idea of the Forms is still Plato's defining characteristic. Kierkegaard and Nietzsche give us tons of new ways of looking at things.
(3): Look no further than these two again. Plus, Socrates continues to break down our given assumptions with the Socratic method.
(4): They offer a new way of looking at life -- somehow (as they are not systematic philosophers)
What did your class think?
I can tell that you're excited - you used "really" a half dozen times...haha.
While I agree with (3) it must be tempered with the truth that we are "standing on the shoulders" of our predecessors, "footnoting Plato", or pick your favorite cliché as regards the debt owed to those who've gone before us.
An important thought that I believe is missing from the discussion is the fact that we all (philosopher or not) have worldviews and therefore make philosophical judgments about the world around us every day. In a sense we're all doing philosophy every day - it's just that most of us are doing it extremely poorly.
The academic study of philosophy should help us to:
1 - identify the beliefs we hold, and the thought processes we go through to establish those beliefs, as we examine the world through the grid of our worldview
2 - critically examine each of these views (and the processes by which we adopted them)
3 - be intellectually honest and willing to jettison those beliefs that can't stand up to scrutiny
BTW - the above is Justified True Belief `~)
Wendy: Thanks for stopping by! I'm not sure precisely what my students think yet -- their first papers are due on Tuesday. In class discussion, they were definitely motivated by Socrates, Kierkegaard and Nietzsche. I doubt anyone is going to argue for Thales, but I still think he's a good example of philosophy's attitude and orientation toward the world. I'm looking forward to their papers next week.
AR: You're absolutely right about the worldview bit. I opened this class a few weeks ago with some pretty standard worldview examination questions and it's been interesting to see the students' responses bubbling under the surface of our class discussion. The thing that always gets me is how difficult it is to demonstrate that a worldview is not just a set of ideas that happily coincides with philosophy but that it is philosophy. There's an intuitive gap here that I find it hard to bridge.
I hope that the approach I've taken is integrative in the sense that it will give the students some categories (I hate that phrase, but it works here) for organizing their own views and beliefs.
Also, I modified my "really"s. I'm not sure if it was excitement or just poor editing. :) I'm willing to chalk it up to the latter.
Post a Comment