Why Philosophy is Dangerous - Essay Example

PHILOSOPHY Introduction Isn’t it strange how philosophy is far more dangerous than walking on slippery rocks? Probably, it would be better to ask why too much thinking causes immense intellectual strain, a starting point for various philosophers going crazy. Many studies done in colleges are meant to educate people regarding a certain subject. However, philosophy is designed in a way that the mode of education teaches people on different ways of thinking. It can be described as the study of all-purpose and elementary subjects, such as subsistence, understanding, principles, basis, mentality and speech. Philosophy is unique in the way it is used in addressing common problems because of its criticism, organized approach and sane argument. Actually, philosophy can be described as the study that helps all the people in understanding mysteries about life and realism. In most cases, philosophers are usually confused with sophists because of the similarities in the nature of their thinking. However, it is important to realize that they are dissimilar in that sophists are professional wise men, whereas philosophers are lovers of wisdom. Philosophy has a lot of advantages since it assists in discovering natural truth, knowledge and helps in finding out about the value of existence. In addition, it explores the relationship connecting human race and the natural world; and provides a link between each person and culture (Russell, 2008). It is important to note that philosophy seems complicated to a lot of people because it revolves around speculation, inquiries, and aspiration to learn more and comprehend each aspect of every issue. Everyone has had the urge to learn more about something which makes philosophy an major part of all human existence. Due to this, philosophy has greatly contributed to our daily lives. For instance, the language spoken in most places can be identified as one of philosophies classifications. The difference between classification of words into nouns, verbs, adverbs et cetera; can be identified as a philosophical classification showing a distinction between actions and things. One important factor about philosophy is that it can be associated with anything because it constitutes everything (Dupré, 2009). Although philosophy has a lot of advantages, many people believe it is a dangerous form of gaining knowledge. Philosophers are always trying to widen their scope of understanding by relating certainty, conviction and all available theories of rationalization. Their field of intellectual strengths requires them to always question and try to establish any truth that can be proven. The establishment of truth has driven many people to classify options of successfully proving any truth into three parts; regress case, foundationalism and reasonable atomism. According to Trilemma, these three options believed to provide truth are not satisfactory to a lot of philosophers. Once a philosopher finds some truth in any given information, he uses it to find more truth. In most cases, the chain of the found truths can go on for eternally. Trilemma puts it “each prove requires a further prove” making philosophy really dangerous (Russell, 2008). For example, the philosophical argument that was used by Kant in 1785 about an answer to the question “what is enlightenment” proves that all printed work by philosophers is dangerous. It is better if stated that all that gets out of any philosopher’s mouth and printed must have an extremely dangerous effect on people. The most affected individuals could be the ones that try using their logic so as to apply the philosophies in the real world. In his writing, Emmanuel Kant shows his expertise in philosophy by defining the words used in question and their interrelationship. After defining, he expounds on the words used in the sentence that described the question. Just as stated above, a philosopher always tries to provide further prove from already existing prove. In the beginning, the argument seems very simple and any person can try to understand the meaning. However, it becomes really complicated as the philosopher tries to relate the first sentence with all the words included in his article. Actually, all the people that have had to read this philosophical article got enlightened at the beginning but ended up more confused at the end. Philosophy has a way of reaching all individuals even the children. The greatest aim of philosophy to children is to make sure that they grow up as tolerant people. The aims are deliberately formed to ensure that kids are open to upcoming solutions, view problems from various and different angles, show respect for their age mates and appreciate others points of views. These aims seem quite helpful to the children but lead them to realize that there is no existence of true answers (Dupré, 2009). The philosophical questions provided to the children have no provided answers. For a young person, this could be too much because they could believe that all opinions are of equal value. In my opinion, this is dangerous because it provides some untrue beliefs to still growing people. In addition, if the kids are made to believe that each answer to any philosophical question could be a right answer, then there ability to criticize decreases. It would be better to allow the children to realize that philosophical questions are essential and could be answered in a satisfactory manner. These kids could start criticizing wrong authorities and provide pretentious answers to some claims. Probably, it would be better if children were not involved in philosophical claims. In any case, philosophy shows that every opinion is as good as the rest. For this reason, the kid’s answers could be just as the other so not really necessary. Philosophy tries to combine words providing any logical combination between them. In most cases, there are different statements that philosophers try to elaborate by connecting relativism, uncertainty and forbearance. These three words involve attitude towards different people. Relativism leaves a lot of people questioning about the children and adults ability to become relativists or even skeptics. However it would be important to question if there is any reason for worry caused by this similarity in philosophical arguments. Having discussed these three words, it is essential to point out that it is dangerous to discuss philosophical issues in a way that false theories could be accepted (Russell, 2008). The danger can be attributed to the fact that relativism has a lot of intrinsic problems that may be proven to be false. Philosophy can be considered dangerous because it is possibly the most horrible enemy of any young person. It is a disquieting and causes perplexity, impatience and apprehension among many people who opt to take philosophy seriously. It is important to understand that the human brain is incapable of understanding simple arguments about subsistence, rationale, intellect, and life’s miraculous happenings. It becomes dangerous when a critical mentality is treated with a lot of doubts. Philosophy is an acceptable science that is not depicted as bad anywhere in history because it involves giving opinions. However, people need to understand that it gets more dangerous to practice philosophy because whatever is criticized is also that is practiced. For instance, according to philosophy, facts about God and many biblical matters are just hypothesis that when converted to assurance become fantasies. This can be attributed to false fantasies especially to those that have faith in the existence of God. In this example, philosophy tries to play with words hence turning the meanings of very common words to complex ones that are harder to comprehend (Dupré, 2009). Conclusion Foundationalism states that in the long run validation could rest on unverified values due to continual such for one truth after another. Probably, it would be essential for philosophers to notice that some facts or even truths cannot be broken down any further. Some facts are too basic that when elaborated in different philosophical ways end up having a complete different meaning. References Dupré, B. (2009). 50 Philosophy Ideas You Really Need to Know. New York: Book Sales. Russell, B. (2008). The Problems of Philosophy. New York: Arc Manor. Read More