What is Philosophy?

For those who don't know, I have decided to major in philosophy for my undergrad studies in NUS. I have encouraged several reactions whenever I told someone about this; people has it mixed up with Psychology, there is the usual "then I better not talk with you again, I don't want to be confessed" respond, the nice and polite "what is philosophy?" and of course the pragmatic "what are you going to do after gradation?" Philosophy seems to equal "cheeminology" for many people who are not expose to the subject, and who can blame them? The common imagination of philosophy seems to be Hollywood's middle-aged, slightly breaded, absent-minded man pacing around the common room of Cambridge, occasionally staring dreamily into space.

I too have thought that philosophy is lofty ideas and abstract concepts completely out of touch with reality, and lacking any practical value. It was not too long ago, at the beginning of the semester in fact, where I left the philosophical department with the impression, well:"These weird people are clueless about the real world, and possible wasting their life." I signed up for the introductory module, just for fun (like everything I do), and quite evidently, changed my view. I guess I can safely say here that a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, or at lease, a misleading thing.

So I attempt here to record down, what (I feel) is philosophy. What is philosophy is actually a much harder question that people expect. it's like my own dilemma of answering: "What is Aikido?" A standard rigid answer like "Aikido is a graceful and gentle martial arts" doesn't seem to cut it, the collection of words doesn't tell the asker anything he or she doesn't know.

I could point to famous philosophers and points to the writing of Plato, Aristotle, Descartes, Hume Kant; but that is not very helpful, especially for those who are unfamiliar with philosophy. And I feel this approach is not very honest, after all philosophy is everywhere you care to look.

The root word came from Greek, and means "Love of Wisdom". If I have to use one word to describe philosophy, I would use: "Question" (some people would use "nonsense"). To me, philosophy is the art of questioning. A quest I would say. Using logical argument, an integrated part of philosophy, it is the examination of ideas and beliefs that most people take for granted.

The diversity of philosophy is really mind boggling. From environmental philosophy, to philosophy of justice, moral, politics, life, mind, film, science, arts, government, religion...the list is endless. The recent court case of the teenager who was surfing on his neighbour's wifi connection has gotten Singaporean talking. He could have been sentenced to a maximum of 3 years in jail. Is it thief? What is stolen? Whose's fault is it? The owner for not securing the connection? If your sprinkler waters the garden of your neighbour, could you say your neighbour is stealing water from you? Is the law fair? Should laws be fair? Could laws be fair? These are questions that arise from a simple news article. Many questions like abortion, right of mothers? Simulated organism, alive? Death penalty, should we? These are questions that should, at the very lease, be considered very seriously.

But why? What's the point? It has been argued that there is no point in studying philosophy as all philosophy ever do is sit around quibbling over the meaning of words. Ancients problems since the time of Plato are still unanswered, and philosophers seems to be uncovering more problems everyday. Job security maybe but they never seem to reach any conclusions of any importance and their contribution to society is non-existent.

Meno has the same thing to say about Socrates around 400 B.C.

Meno: Socrates, even before I met you, I heard others talk about how you are always completely perplexed about everything, and how you drag everyone else down into the same pit of perplexity. And now here we are. I think you have been bewitching and enchanting me. You've cast some spell over me, so now I'm completely at a loss. In fact, if you don't mind my making a bit of a joke, I think you're very like a stingray - that strange flat fish that paralyses anyone who approaches and touches it - and not just in that way. You look like one, too.

Nigel Warburnton discuss in his book Basic Philosophy that:

"Start to question the fundamental assumptions of our lives could be dangerous, we might end up feeling unable to do anything, paralysed by questioning too much."

But humans, you and me, are born questioners. By that fact, all kids are great philosophers. Our young questioning mind holds the world in awe. Life was a series of questions, often followed by bad answers. For example, the physicist Richard Feynman liked to tell a story about how when he was a little kid, he asked his father, "Why do things fall. As an adult, he praised his father for answering, "Nobody knows why things fall. It’s a deep mystery, and the smartest people in the world don't know the basic reason for it." Contrast that with the average person’s off-the-cuff answer, "Oh, it’s because of gravity." (http://www.faqs.org/docs/Newtonian/Newtonian_77.htm)

Thinking back, many of the questions that I had as a child has not been answered, and more has emerged as I live my life. If has been said that an unexamined life is not worth living, no? It is my belief that for many people, it takes too much effort or too disturbing to ask ourselves such questions. Philosophy provides a fantastic platform to examine these questions.

I'm going to borrow an example here from BBC News:

One day, you wake up in hospital. In the nearby bed lies a world famous violinist who is connected to you with various tubes and machines.

To your horror, you discover that you have been kidnapped by the Music Appreciation Society. Aware of the maestro's impending death, they hooked you up to the violinist.

If you stay in the hospital bed, connected to the violinist, he will be totally cured in nine months. You are unlikely to suffer harm. No one else can save him. Do you have an obligation to stay connected?

The creator of the experiment, Judith Thomson, thinks the answer is "no". It would be generous if you did, she claims, but there is no obligation to stay, even if that means the violinist will die.

So how is this bizarre scenario related to the real world? Thomson used the experiment to show that a pregnant woman need not go to full term with her baby, as long as she had taken reasonable steps to avoid getting pregnant. It is thus a "pro-choice" argument.

The violinist represents the baby, and you - in the hospital bed - play the role of the mother. If you think unhooking yourself from the violinist is acceptable, but aborting an unwanted foetus is not, what are the moral differences between the two cases? In both situations, you could save a person by bearing a great burden for nine months.

I could not tell you how to think or respond in the above situation but I can show you inconsistencies in your thoughts if the 2 answer differ. There may not be an answer, but the question itself have opened new doors to look at the issue and the world.

Can you really solve real problems by thinking about things? Well, Galileo did. Aristotle believed that things fall at different speed based on their weight, and it was held as truth for centuries. Until Galileo extend the concept logically and come to a totally different conclusion:

SIMPLICIO: There can be no doubt but that a particular body ... has a fixed velocity which is determined by nature...

SALVIATI: If then we take two bodies whose natural speeds are different, it is clear that, [according to Aristotle], on uniting the two, the more rapid one will be partly held back by the slower, and the slower will be somewhat hastened by the swifter. Do you not agree with me
in this opinion.

SIMPLICIO: You are unquestionably right.

SALVIATI: But if this is true, and if a large stone moves with a speed of, say, eight [unspecified units] while a smaller moves with a speed of four, then when they are united, the system will move with a speed less than eight; but the two stones when tied together make a stone larger than that which before moved with a speed of eight. Hence the heavier body moves with less speed than the lighter; an effect which is contrary to your supposition. Thus you see how, from your assumption that the heavier body moves more rapidly than the lighter one, I infer that the heavier body moves more slowly.
[tr. Crew and De Salvio]

Stories have it that Galileo never saw the need to test his conclusion by dropping 2 balls from the tower of Pairs.

Philosophy severs at least another function by detecting bullshit. There are so many inconsistencies and ridiculous nonsense in the world that someone must say, "hang on, that doesn't sound right."

Lastly, I want to end by saying that everyone, whether you realises it or not, is a philosopher. Almost everyday, at so point, everyone engages in philosophical thoughts. Just like what my philosophy professor told us: "philosophy is not a thing that flourishes only in artificial environments ... like philosophy departments. No, it’s a stubborn, hardy weed that springs up just about everywhere you might care to look...".

Come for the answer, stay for the questions.

P/S: "The value of philosophy" by Bertand Russell makes the point better than I ever could. See it here: http://skepdic.com/russell.html