Well this week's first class period got a little heated between myself and another student, and it really made me quite defensive about my position on this subject of philosophy and action. So, for this week's blog, I'm going to dictate my stance on the question of whether or not philosophy is useful in relation to the actions we take in our day to day lives.
Yes. Totally and unequivocally yes.
Why? Because without philosophy, our lives go around based on instinct. During class, the student I was arguing against said that philosophy was not useful because it did absolutely nothing. He claimed that sitting around and thinking about things, while nice, was not the way to get things done in a meaningful society. I believe that is completely false. Saying that action is the only useful part in a society is like saying that the grocery store is the only useful part in the food chain because it's the place that actually sells you the product. And that's completely wrong. To say that the whole chain is unimportant because the last person is the person that acts is to claim that the last person did all the work. If you think that way, you build a society based on being the person to be the final link in that chain. Imagine if the cure for cancer was found, and instead of the team of scientists getting the credit for the work, only the man who gave the medicine got any of the credit, even if that man had nothing to do with the creation of said medicine. Similarly, to claim that the reasons behind action have no usefulness because they do not take the action themselves is equally faulty. I will not claim that action is not important, some might say that without action, philosophy would indeed be useless to us. But to say that philosophy is useless even if it precipitates action is both a false statement, and a terrible way of viewing the work of people around you.
I would absolutely agree with you. I think philosophizing brings us to answers that make action understandable, not just in the moment, but also in a grander sense. If we do not question why we even act to begin with, then we run into the major problem of action without purpose. And that's a distinction that must be considered, because a world that contains people who merely act for the sake of action has no depth. And while that may be fine for some, it does not negate the fact that many have a predisposition to a more fundamental context in which life is housed. For myself, if I did not question the very basis of existence, I would never arrive to reasoned positions that place my actions into a larger framework. The narrative would have no foundation, and every action would more or less be arbitrary, or at best reactionary. But with freedom comes choice, and with choice comes responsibility, thus my reflection upon that responsibility pushes me to most basic question of "why?" And I do my best to apply that to anything and everything, which is a core concept of philosophy in general, as well as existentialism. Additionally, it is immensely important, in my view, to consider that "how?" question as well. With all of us being here in this world, in the lives that we live, with no objective truths to anchor us, how ought we to act? So, in asking why act and how ought we to act, we gain a deeper knowledge of what we are, thereby allowing us to willfully push humanity forward. While not everyone will agree as to what "forward" really entails, the idea in and of itself would not be possible without philosophical discourse. I can see where for many philosophy, and in particular existentialism, would seem like a fruitless line of inquiry, as it can produce question that seemingly undermine one's sense of agency. Staring down a truth such as the fact that life has no objective meaning can take the metaphorical wind out of someone's sails if they are not strong enough to take those sorts of things head on. But it is undeniable that philosophizing has significant utility, whether one feels as though it does for them or not.
ReplyDelete