Monday 10 September 2012

The Value of Philosophy


For anyone who has seriously studied philosophy, there is one question that you will hear time and time again. What is the value of philosophy? Despite the many writings of philosophers on this subject over the ages, the question still remains for many of those outside the discipline. Such questions as what does philosophy do for us, what benefits have we gained from philosophy, what definite answers has it given us, and so on are commonplace. These questions are quite valid in modern times because the concept of philosophy has changed greatly over its history. In the beginning, the goals of philosophy were clear. However, as time went on and philosophy evolved its over-arching ambition has become hazy.

In the very beginnings of philosophy, its main focus was educational. In ancient Greece, the first schools were schools of philosophy and math. If one wanted to be educated and learn, one would attend these philosophy schools and be taught by the philosophers of the day. Over the years, these schools would produce and create the information and eventually the disciplines of many other subjects. In general, most subjects, once they acquired enough information to exist on their own merit, would then separate from philosophy and create their own discipline. Therefore, in a sense, philosophy began as encompassing practically all educational knowledge at the time, and slowly bled out the more standardized disciplines. As a result, what we have today is very different from the origins of philosophy. However, there are many aspects which have remained and are still central to many philosophical theories and branches. 

One of my favourite modern philosophers, Bertrand Russell, attempted to answer the questions about the values of philosophy in his book “The Problems of Philosophy”. He dedicated a chapter to explaining what he thought was the modern value of philosophy which I will attempt to explain here.

One of the main arguments against philosophy being useful is that we cannot outright see any possible benefits from it. Obviously, as I stated above, this is not the case with philosophy throughout all of history, but specifically in modern times one may put forth this argument. People are “inclined to doubt whether philosophy is anything better than innocent but useless trifling, hair-splitting distinctions, and controversies on matters concerning knowledge which is impossible” (Russell). From a scientific standpoint, the physical sciences are very useful to everyone even if they are completely ignorant of it. However, this type of utility is not part of philosophy for obvious reasons. The value of philosophy for those who do not study it is quite limited and may only indirectly influence them by means of those who do study it.

Russell does reference what he calls ‘practical men’ and their prejudices. Russell states that “if all men were well off, if poverty and disease had been reduced to their lowest possible point, there would still remain much to be done to produce a valuable society” (Russell). Therefore, science alone cannot adequately provide value to our lives. In Russell’s opinion, that was one of philosophy’s aims; the aim of knowledge which results from critical examination of our convictions, prejudices, and beliefs. However, he quickly points out that philosophy was originally not very successful in this regard. As mentioned above, once definite knowledge of subjects was possible, they ceased to be called philosophy and became their own disciplines (for example, the study of the cosmos became astronomy; the study of the human mind became psychology; etc.). As a result, all the questions that we had no definite answers for remained and are what we call philosophy today.

This is only part of the overall picture however. There are also questions which “are of the profoundest interest to our spiritual life” (Russell) that fall into the realm of philosophy. For example, does the universe have any unity or plan or is it just a bunch of fortuitous atoms; and are good and evil important to the universe or only humans. It is not necessarily philosophy’s goal to find a true or final answer to these questions. Instead, it should work to continue asking such questions which helps to make us aware of their importance, helps us examine all the approaches to them, and possibly most important, keeps alive that interest in the universe which Russell was afraid would be destroyed if we were to confine ourselves to only the definitely ascertainable knowledge (Russell).

Therefore, it is precisely in the uncertainty of philosophy where its value lies. “The man who has no tincture of philosophy goes through life imprisoned in the prejudices derived from common sense, from the habitual beliefs of his age or nation, and form convictions which have grown up in his mind without the co-operations of consent of his deliberate reason” (Russell). In other words, without philosophy there really isn’t much thought outside of what one has been told to think. Despite philosophy not supplying definite answers, it is “able to suggest many possibilities which enlarge our thoughts and free them from the tyranny of custom” (Russell). In that sense, it does increase our knowledge as well as relieve us of arrogant dogmatism.

Philosophy goes even further and creates a greatness of the actual objects of contemplation themselves. Russell compares those who don’t philosophize to “a garrison in a beleaguered fortress, knowing that the enemy prevents escape and that ultimate surrender is inevitable. In such a life, there is no peace, but a constant strife between the insistence of desire and the powerlessness of will” (Russell). This suggests that such a world for those who do not philosophize is quite small and based merely on instinctive wishes and interests. Someone thinking in such a way can only wait for the great and powerful world outside to eventually come crashing down over them. 

Therefore, it is Russell’s contention that knowledge works as an enlargement of ‘Self’ and this can be reached through philosophical contemplation. This concept lies in direct contrast to the theory that “man is the measure of all things, that truth is man-made, that space and time and the world of universals are properties of the mind, and that, if there be anything not created by the mind, it is unknowable and of no account for us” (Russell). This knowledge, Russell argues, is only a group of prejudices, habits, and desires which works to create a veil of lies between us and the world outside.

In conclusion, I will leave you with Russell’s words which, in my opinion, perfectly sum up the value of philosophy in our modern times:

Philosophy is to be studied, not for the sake of any definite answers to its questions since no definite answers can, as a rule, be known to be true, but rather for the sake of the questions themselves; because these questions enlarge our conception of what is possible, enrich our intellectual imagination and diminish the dogmatic assurance which closes the mind against speculation; but above all because, through the greatness of the universe which philosophy contemplates, the mind also is rendered great, and becomes capable of that union with the universe which constitutes its highest good (Russell).

*all quotations taken from Bertrand Russell – “Problems of Philosophy” Ch 15 The Value of Philosophy

No comments:

Post a Comment