When does philosophy become drivel and why?

[Vautrin]

I'm all for getting my hands dirty in a philosophical discussion. Questioning everything and taking nothing at face value is how I try to live my life. However, when does philosophical reflection cross the border into the Republic of Rubbish? And Why?

From my own personal experience, I've noticed it gets people's eyes rolling when the situation is tense and they want direct, concrete answers to a problem or crisis. Is a truly philosophical view only tolerated when people have the luxury of time? Outside of the world of Academia, at what point does Philosophy become something far less helpful or desirable?

[The Atheist]

I'm all for getting my hands dirty in a philosophical discussion.

Me too!

Questioning everything and taking nothing at face value is how I try to live my life. However, when does philosophical reflection cross the border into the Republic of Rubbish? And Why?

When you've read The Republic and realise it's rubbish, you're on the right side of the line.

From my own personal experience, I've noticed it gets people's eyes rolling when the situation is tense and they want direct, concrete answers to a problem or crisis.

Thankfully, there are a lot more pragmatists than philosophers in the world.

Is a truly philosophical view only tolerated when people have the luxury of time? Outside of the world of Academia, at what point does Philosophy become something far less helpful or desirable?

I'd go as far as saying, everywhere outside of academia it's largely unhelpful.

I'm not sure philosophy has much to offer the world of Higgs bosons.

[Satan]

When does philosophy become drivel and why?

When you're not interested in it, and because it is mostly concerned with analyzing life in stead of living it.

[Lote-Tree]

Philosophy is complete waste of time...did philosophy invent pencilin? or fly men to the moon? No.

[Satan]

Philosophy is complete waste of time.

No, it's not. Penicillin and moon missions cannot cure the void that the consciousness creates between life and its purpose or meaning. All our scientific prowess is keeping us alive and busy; busy, because idleness and silence yield to thoughts, and then you sink into the sea of tranquility that not only questions the worth of your existence but also the why of it.

Every aspect of modern humans -- be it the social structure, politics, science, law, religion and even business has stemmed from the roots of philosophical investigations of everyday life. To deny philosophy is to deny thoughts and wisdom. But then it would be only philosophical to question the importance and relevance of questioning itself.

Is philosophy dying? Yes, the academia is killing it. They have reduced it to a formal set of analytical tools, and only the professionals are licensed to think.

[grace86]

You've reminded me of a philosophy class I took in junior college on the study of ethics. I love philosophy, and the fact that the ability to think and mentally construct all of these different notions of life is something the human race has apart from other species on the planet. Thinking, and/or (? ) is one of those aspects unique to us and as such we're able to relate to outside circumstances and other people. I agree that philosophy has had groundwork within other branches like science and politics. However, the class I took was three hours in duration, 7:00 - 10:00 p.m. on a Monday night after working a job full time that day. Sitting in a seminar under these circumstances can DEFINITELY stalemate one's interest in philosophy and leave one a bit frustrated that there "are no right answers" - especially lacking dinner.

So I agree that in a practical and life living busy scenario...dealing with philosophy can seem pretty much like rubbish. Yet I value it highly and in its proper time.

Just my bit of rubbish!!

[Vautrin]

No, it's not. Penicillin and moon missions cannot cure the void that the consciousness creates between life and its purpose or meaning. All our scientific prowess is keeping us alive and busy; busy, because idleness and silence yield to thoughts, and then you sink into the sea of tranquility that not only questions the worth of your existence but also the why of it.

Every aspect of modern humans -- be it the social structure, politics, science, law, religion and even business has stemmed from the roots of philosophical investigations of everyday life. To deny philosophy is to deny thoughts and wisdom. But then it would be only philosophical to question the importance and relevance of questioning itself.

Is philosophy dying? Yes, the academia is killing it. They have reduced it to a formal set of analytical tools, and only the professionals are licensed to think.

I agree. Every major field of study essentially started off as a thought in someone's mind. In a way philosophy is the mother of all disciplines.

Now that we've established that; When does philosophy become drivel even in this context? When does a philosophical thought begin to contribute close to nothing to a field of study or a facet of human civilization? Can ideas after a certain point simply become excessive or unnecessary? Is there a cap on the progress gained through philosophy, or is the sky the limit?

[JacobF]

Thankfully, there are a lot more pragmatists than philosophers in the world.

Isn't pragmatism a philosophical position?

I don't buy into the belief that philosophy is useless. Sure, sitting around and thinking doesn't "get things done," but what's the purpose of doing so if you don't reflect on your actions afterward? And life as a whole? Everybody can benefit from philosophy.

[paradoxical]

When you've read The Republic and realise it's rubbish, you're on the right side of the line.

I'm curious, why would you say that?

Personally, I enjoy philosophy. I also believe that man, since prehistoric times, has always wanted to know the 'why' and not just the 'how'. I believe that this desire for meaning and understanding (which, after all is what philosophy is all about) is part of the human condition.

As was pointed out, all of our culture and religion -- our entire social structure -- is built upon philosophical beliefs. Sure, in today's corporate environment, and other segments of our materialistic society, the only thing that matters is the amount of money one can make, and there is even disdain for such things as philosophy, art, and religion. Perhaps you could classify this as nihilism, and it would actually be a kind of philosophy, after all.

But I know that most people reach a stage in life where, no matter how obtuse they have been in the past, they began to question why? They begin to search for answers. Why are we born? What happens when we die? What is the purpose of our lives? They search for answers in literature, art, religion, or perhaps go straight to philosophy, but all of these disciplines are underpinned by philosophy. In short, philosophy never becomes mere drivel.

[Katy North]

I would say that philosophy only becomes obsolete if any "factual" information it was based on became obsolete.

For example, if it was proven %100 that there was a god, philosophies based on atheism would become obsolete, and vica versa.

As for the question "When does a philosophy become drivel?" I believe the answer would be "when you stop believing it is true".

[Lote-Tree]

Every aspect of modern humans -- be it the social structure, politics, science, law, religion and even business has stemmed from the roots of philosophical investigations of everyday life.

And we have now realised that that kind of investigations yields nothing.

It did not produce pencilin or fly men to the moon. It did not discover the begining of the Universe or make blind men see or explain the origins of humanity.

And after 2000 years of philosophical quest for God it yielded nothing. It was a complete waste of time...

[Jozanny]

It can be argued that metaphysical inquiry has failed in the 2000 years it has been a philosophical discipline. It can also be countermanded that, just because metaphysical problems pose a series of contradictions, this doesn't mean they shouldn't be struggled with. (I derive a great deal of entertainment watching Harvard instructors play the great egalitarian to a freshman class of over a 100 students who look ghetto dependent while paying a fortune to be in their lecture hall, what can I say?)

Classical philosophy has spawned many disciplines, and in turn derives new problems from these: linguistics, political science, bio ethics.

Metaphysics, however, is still the Platonic-Kantian pulp fruit that keeps the engines of philosophy oiled; having said all this, I will probably be dead before I ever fully get a handle on Kant or Nietzsche (and Nietzsche leads to Foucault) or Hegel, for that matter--and phenomenology is important towards meta-theory.

[Quark]

Classical philosophy has spawned many disciplines, and in turn derives new problems from these: linguistics, political science, bio ethics.

That's a good point. I also think philosophy acts as an intermediary between advanced disciplines or institutions and the average, moderately-educated person. When Plato writes about justice, he's explaining how political institutions work to people who didn't have the experience--or even the ability to imagine--how the state works. Socrates' idea is that the state functions by creating tasks (production, defense, leadership) and delegating those tasks. This gives people who haven't experienced everything in the political body a way of understanding politics. Similarly, today much of what's being done now in philosophy is questioning the basis of scientific claims. Ever since Kuhn's Structure of Scientific Revolutions, philosophers have asked how we can be sure what scientists are saying is objectively true. The sciences are so vast and deep that no one can possibly know everything they have to say, yet we all assume that they're true. Recent philosophy tries to act as the intermediary here, and explain if and how we can trust scientific claims.

As for the OP:

when does philosophical reflection cross the border into the Republic of Rubbish?

When philosophy becomes more concerned with itself than its role as questioner or intermediary, then I think we've crossed that border. Some of philosophy just sounds like an internal squabble between huge-egoed men with little to actually contribute--Richard Rorty is a name that comes to mind. When philosophy becomes so self-absorbed that even people as smart as Rorty can't escape it, then it's a waste of time.

[blazeofglory]

To think philosophy is drivel is drivel in itself. For without philosophy how dull life would be with no inquiry into who we are. Not that we have been able to answer exactly who we are or where we are from. You can say biologically we are men, homo-sapiens or thinking animals. You can say we have come from our parents or you can point to the geographies you are from.

But still we want a different answer. Don't we?

This is wherein philosophy interests us.

[The Atheist]

No, it's not. Penicillin and moon missions cannot cure the void that the consciousness creates between life and its purpose or meaning. All our scientific prowess is keeping us alive and busy; busy, because idleness and silence yield to thoughts, and then you sink into the sea of tranquility that not only questions the worth of your existence but also the why of it.

Nope, this is just a plea for magic, I'm sorry.

If there is no purpose to life other than just living it, I can't see where philosophy will or even can, provide answers.

Like religion, philosophy is a 10,000-year fail.

Every aspect of modern humans -- be it the social structure, politics, science, law, religion and even business has stemmed from the roots of philosophical investigations of everyday life.

No problem there, earlier philosophies did ask some questions which needed considering, but it really is irrelevant in 2010.

To deny philosophy is to deny thoughts and wisdom.

You seem to be incorrectly conflating philosophy and abstract & critical thinking, plus, you'd need to present some serious evidence of the outrageous claim that wisdom only comes from philosophy.

Is philosophy dying? Yes, the academia is killing it. They have reduced it to a formal set of analytical tools, and only the professionals are licensed to think.

And thank god for that!

Isn't pragmatism a philosophical position?

It can be, but the practice itself isn't really philosophical. Just show me the evidence.

I don't buy into the belief that philosophy is useless. Sure, sitting around and thinking doesn't "get things done," but what's the purpose of doing so if you don't reflect on your actions afterward? And life as a whole? Everybody can benefit from philosophy.

Again, I think this is just conflating Philosophy and philosophy. Proper noun Philosophy as a school of thought and study is bunkum, thinking about the world and oneself isn't.

Maybe that's the entire issue?

I'm curious, why would you say that?

Personally, I enjoy philosophy. I also believe that man, since prehistoric times, has always wanted to know the 'why' and not just the 'how'. I believe that this desire for meaning and understanding (which, after all is what philosophy is all about) is part of the human condition.

And how much human endeavour has been wasted asking that one question?

From a historical perspective, yes, it's important to understand how our thinking arose, but once we know how to ask questions, Philosophy as a discipline is a waste of space.

As was pointed out, all of our culture and religion -- our entire social structure -- is built upon philosophical beliefs.

Well, I'd kill religion off gladly, and as I said above, I'm not sure the world we've modelled is actually the right one.

I tend to see the kind of thinking usually reserved under the label "philosophy" as holding things back rather than advancing anything.

I usually use the abortion as the best example. Philosophy can give no answer as to whether it's right or wrong. Philosophy can't deal with real world problems because it isn't real.

Sure, in today's corporate environment, and other segments of our materialistic society, the only thing that matters is the amount of money one can make, and there is even disdain for such things as philosophy, art, and religion. Perhaps you could classify this as nihilism, and it would actually be a kind of philosophy, after all.

This is asking if philosophy is better than capitalism.

Given that the Industrial Revolution has given us everything we have and philosophy has given us nothing, I'd say the child of the Industrial Revolution, capitalism, is winning by a long way.

But I know that most people reach a stage in life where, no matter how obtuse they have been in the past, they began to question why? They begin to search for answers. Why are we born? What happens when we die? What is the purpose of our lives? They search for answers in literature, art, religion, or perhaps go straight to philosophy, but all of these disciplines are underpinned by philosophy. In short, philosophy never becomes mere drivel.

That looks pretty good at first glance, but can you point to which of those questions philosophy has actually answered?

Science tells us why we're born and die; it tells us why the universe exists and we might soon find out what it can and will do.

For example, if it was proven %100 that there was a god, philosophies based on atheism would become obsolete, and vica versa.

No, some philosopher would demand that we cannot prove reality, so proof is only a relative term.

But still we want a different answer. Don't we?

Some people do.

I have yet to see where any philosophy not based on scientific evidence does more than confuse people, however.