Philosophy Gone Wrong
by Joseph Rowlands
Having a conversation with someone I know, the discussion went to philosophy as it often does. We quickly came to disagreements because we had very different views on what the purpose of philosophy is. As an Objectivist, I see it as providing us information about the world and ourselves. It gives us insight into how we are aware of the world, and how we can know that our knowledge is valid. So philosophy is a tool to better understanding the world and our place in it.
His view was the opposite. He believed that the purpose of philosophy was to make us question our beliefs. Based on the truth that people do make mistakes and sometimes think they're right when they're not, he believed the goal of philosophy was to make us go back to the basics and quit assuming so much. It wasn't to answer the big questions in life, but to make us ask them in the first place.
At that level, it doesn't sound like the differences are too great. After all, Objectivism is the philosophy that says "Check your premises!". As Objectivists, we often reevaluate basic beliefs. We ask ourselves how we can know the things we do. And it's precisely because we can make mistakes that we go back and reexamine our ideas.
But that's not what he was getting at. For him, the goal of philosophy is to live in continuous doubt of your knowledge. The fear might be that if you're unwilling to check your premises, it can lead you down the path of disaster. But talk about solving a little problem with a big hammer! If unwarranted certainty is the vice, you don't throw out all certainty! If flaws in your knowledge is a problem, you don't throw out all knowledge!
This isn't exactly skepticism he's talking about, although skepticism would be the logical outcome of it. Skepticism is intended to invalidate all knowledge. The goal of the doubting philosophy is to just keep everyone on their toes. Don't get too relaxed and sure of your way. Don't take yourself too seriously. Don't be too certain of anything.
Now we can view this mistaken view of philosophy for the disaster it would be in practice. How can you walk across the room when you have to doubt whether your muscles will work, whether the floor will hold up to your weight, or whether the room will still be there when you get done? It's a recipe for fear and indecisiveness. You couldn't do anything because you'd have to question every assumption behind it, and every assumption behind that. If you get hungry, you'd have to contemplate your entire understanding of human life while the bag of potato chips sits in arms reach. Not exactly a practical theory of philosophy.
It's also interesting to think about how someone with that view of philosophy would view Objectivism. He would see it as a horrible mistake. A philosophy that integrates your beliefs makes any potential flaw that much more difficult to get rid of. A philosophy that makes explicit how to properly gain knowledge would be used as an excuse to be certain of some of it. By understanding the philosophy better, it would actually reinforce your beliefs. It would have the exact opposite effect as that desired by the doubter.
Are there explicit examples of this view? The art world is full of them. The Objectivist view of the purpose of art is that it serves to concretize our widest abstractions, giving us a clearer view of the world. By bringing these complex views of the world and man's role in it to a more concrete level, we're better able to utilize these abstractions in our lives.
The opposite can be seen in today's art culture of shock, disturbing images, and nonsense. All of this is intended to keep you off balance. A standard rationale used to support this kind of art is that it "makes you think" and "question cherished beliefs". The goal isn't to enlighten or inform, but to shock you out of your complacency. If people say they're disgusted or get angry at it, the artist has done his job. In this view, the primary purpose of art is to disintegrate one's view of the world. They want to turn your world upside down and have you question everything you thought you knew. The goal isn't to bring clarity to your thoughts, but to shatter them and leave you dazed and confused, looking for something to hold on to.
This is just the philosophy put into practice. You can see other examples of it, such as professors of philosophy happy that their students left their classes with more doubts and confusion than when the came in. Or in ethics, you see those people who use life-boat scenarios to attack a person's general sense of right and wrong. This whole view of philosophy is best summarized by a bunch of teenagers wearing black in a coffee shop saying "Whoa, man. What if the world doesn't really exist?"
This is not the point of philosophy. This is in fact the reason so many people hold philosophy with such disdain. And the cure to this pathology is Objectivism, the philosophy for living.
Discuss this Article (20 messages)
|
