The making of a philosopher: a proposal: Philosophy Forums

Philosophy Forums » General Philosophy » The making of a philosopher: a proposal » The making of a philosopher: a proposal

The making of a philosopher: a proposal

Page: 1 2 3 4

The making of a philosopher: a proposal

moreno
Graduate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jun 02, 2007
Total Topics: 2
Total Posts: 198

Posted 07/24/07 - 11:08 PM: Subject: The making of a philosopher: a proposal	#1
Philosophers should: 1) be able to speak at least on foreign language fluently, preferably a language quite distant from their native tongue - someone beginning with a European language could learn Japanese, for example. By fluent I mean THINKS in the other language. 2) have had deep cross-cultural experiences. Perhaps they lived in a foreign country or within their own country worked with, lived with or otherwise had complicated interactions with members of another culture and been forced to a) translate ideas, traditions, intentions, interpretations back and forth between the two cultures. 3) have a deep EXPERIENCE of their own emotional make-up. Via psychotherapy or any other process where they face and experience much of their own emotions and reactions. This process would include many surprises and self-reevaluations. 4) have been active in some kind of experiental exploration similar to the ones undergone by practitioners of various religions: meditation, contemplation, inner imaginative work, shamanistic practices, etc. 5) have undergone deep, intense, dare I say confrontational interactions with the other sex where the goal was for each to understand the EXPERIENCE OF THE OTHER very deeply. 6) been creative in some art form - 'art' taken very broadly, but meant to include the production of artifacts primarily for the aesthetic experiences of others and requiring the use of the imagination. When people think of the education of a philosopher they often think in terms of reading, arguing, training in logic and so on. The filling of the mind, the training of the mental faculties of the mind. This is not enough. People are stuck in societal habits of experiencing. Limitations placed by one's culture and language. Training in what one really should not notice or take seriously and what one should focus one's attention on. A philosopher must have a rich EXPERIENTAL range or they will simply repeat the ideas generated by the culture around them. They will make assumptions based on dominant metaphors and ways of experiencing guided by their native tongues and confuse these with the full range of experiencing reality. They will, if trained and overvaluing verbal mental identity, NOT KNOW their own emotional motivations and not notice how their beliefs fit their own needs. With a rich range of transcultural experience - experience beyond one's native culture, the individual one created by the society they were born in, the parents they had and the circles they tend to move in and discuss things with - one has a much better chance of not simply repeating received notions and LIMITS. What is the box you are in? What kinds of EXPERIENTAL work could you do to move out of this box? It is not simply a matter of becoming objective, though this is true. It is a matter of having a richer subjective base from which to know the world. You cannot become more objective by stifling subjectivity. In fact enriching subjective experience - stopping the processes whereby you limit subjectivity - enriches objectivity.

aesop
Initiate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Mar 09, 2007
Location: Australia
Total Topics: 4
Total Posts: 18

Posted 07/25/07 - 05:02 AM:	#2
No one is capable of experiencing everything. Physical limitations of our bodies-and this world-warrant that fact. And given this is true, you cannot claim that knowledge of everything is a viable goal. My reading of your post suggests that you understand this, which is why you have chosen to set relative (finite) requirements. For example, knowing two languages or, how to express yourself through art. However these pursuits will only broaden your intellectual horizons as they stand now. But those are relative to you as an individual. They exist by our conception with limits, so whether you have a lot or a little.. in the end there is no difference. Compared to infinity, all amounts are equally minute. But then, is this not the entire purpose of undertaking philosophy (being a philosopher)? The pursuit of knowledge. Seeking to understand what we have experienced. We will never experience (and therefore never understand) everything, but that doesn't mean you can't understand the world as presented through your own perspective. It is ridiculous to contend that one would require a minimum experience of language, art or sex to be considered a true philosopher. At the end of the day, what does any of that mean? It is your attempt to approach personal enlightenment through contemplation of the things you have experienced that qualify you as a 'lover of wisdom.' Knowing more only makes putting the pieces together all the more difficult! Edited by aesop on 07/25/07 - 05:12 AM

__RavErz__
Aspirant

Usergroup: Members
Joined: May 16, 2007
Total Topics: 2
Total Posts: 27

Posted 07/25/07 - 05:25 AM:	#3
I am surprized if you know any philosophers at all... They must participate actively in art, language, and alternative therapies? High standards. Why bother?

HolisticBeing
Graduate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jun 18, 2007
Total Topics: 12
Total Posts: 214

Posted 07/25/07 - 06:33 AM:	#4
How retarded. You have excluded just about every philosopher who has ever lived with your ridiculously stringent demands.

select
Tenured Poster

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Dec 22, 2003
Location: Arizona, United States
Total Topics: 89
Total Posts: 1183

Posted 07/25/07 - 06:34 AM:	#5
I think you're trying to describe a sage, not a philosopher. But it's still questionable whether all of that would produce a sage. A philosopher really is an intellectual specialist, he/she's not necessarily a person possessing wisdom. Unless you consider wisdom as the possession of certain knowledge.
"To create man was a fine and original idea; but to add sheep was a tautology." Mark Twain

Wowbagger
Goal achiever

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jul 16, 2007
Total Topics: 7
Total Posts: 240

Posted 07/25/07 - 08:14 AM:	#6
All a philosopher needs is time and curiosity.

moreno
Graduate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jun 02, 2007
Total Topics: 2
Total Posts: 198

Posted 07/25/07 - 11:30 PM:	#7
HolisticBeing wrote: How retarded. You have excluded just about every philosopher who has ever lived with your ridiculously stringent demands. What an ironic name choice you have given your reaction. But in a way your point is valid. I recently read a History of PHilosophy and I was startled to note how limited and similar THE APPROACHES were and the experiences of the philosophers. heads in books seemed to be their primary ´training´. I think this leaves one culturally naive and lacking in self-insight. Not to mention just how few women decide to be philosophers or are accepted as such.

moreno
Graduate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jun 02, 2007
Total Topics: 2
Total Posts: 198

Posted 07/25/07 - 11:31 PM:	#8
Wowbagger wrote: All a philosopher needs is time and curiosity. I think that curiosity has been very limited.

moreno
Graduate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jun 02, 2007
Total Topics: 2
Total Posts: 198

Posted 07/25/07 - 11:34 PM:	#9
select wrote: I think you're trying to describe a sage, not a philosopher. But it's still questionable whether all of that would produce a sage. A philosopher really is an intellectual specialist, he/she's not necessarily a person possessing wisdom. Unless you consider wisdom as the possession of certain knowledge. You would think having wisdom would not be an optional trait for someone who is setting out to say how things really are. My point is not to make them sages, but to make them aware of the cultural, historical, linguistic and gender-based assumptions they make about probably every possible topic in philosophy. If you don´t challenge those you are simply rehashing with a lot of hard words ideas coming from biases.

moreno
Graduate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jun 02, 2007
Total Topics: 2
Total Posts: 198

Posted 07/25/07 - 11:41 PM:	#10
[quote=aesop] However these pursuits will only broaden your intellectual horizons as they stand now. But those are relative to you as an individual. They exist by our conception with limits, so whether you have a lot or a little.. in the end there is no difference. Compared to infinity, all amounts are equally minute. There is a vast difference between simply knowing your native language and learning a different one. Two is a differnce in kind not simply quantity. But then, is this not the entire purpose of undertaking philosophy (being a philosopher)? The pursuit of knowledge. Seeking to understand what we have experienced. My point is that we need to expand that experience beyond the HABITS. It is ridiculous to contend that one would require a minimum experience of language, art or sex to be considered a true philosopher. As it stands now in Western societies, there are language requirements, a lot of reading and demanding dissertation writing and defense requirements. My sense is the criteria now used are too focused on mental verbal analysis, logic, reading and writing. If you are really going to come up with something interesting and not merely a rehashing of other people´s words probably from within your own culture you need to focus more on the experiental side of things and getting beyond your own biases. I am shifting the focus. I am not saying my proposal makes someone a philospher. I am pointing out that the current biases in the system and the way philosophers are conceived of is odd, limited and will lead to rehashing. At the end of the day, what does any of that mean? It is your attempt to approach personal enlightenment through contemplation of the things you have experienced that qualify you as a 'lover of wisdom.' Knowing more only makes putting the pieces together all the more difficult! So you would actually see learning another language, for example, as an obstacle and that information and perspectives that gave you as distractions.

Page: 1 2 3 4

You don't have permission to post.

Please login or register.