# The Philosophy Of Philosophy



## Karl (Aug 14, 2016)

I want to start a thread on the philosophy of hunting.

But before doing so, I need to start one on the philosophy of philosophy first. So here goes. The hunting philosophy will follow later, maybe in a few days.

Philosophy 101

If you went to college or even to a Catholic high school, then you probably had access to some kind of introductory philosophy course. Public high schools don't tent to teach these since there are few if any qualified high school teachers who can. However within the Catholic clergy there is extensive emphasis on San Tomas Aquinas' philosophy of God.

So if you went to college and took Philosophy 101, or to Catholic high school (sometimes called college prep) and took the philosophy option, then you are familiar with the great names such as Hesiod, Thales, Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Augustine, Aquinas, Descartes, Liebniz, Kant, Locke, Kierkegaard, Russell etc.

Otherwise you have probably only heard of Plato and maybe Socrates, at most.

Philosophy is an outgrowth from ancient religion, even as science is an outgrowth from Medieval philosophy. That's how all 3 major belief systems -- religion, philosophy, and science -- came into being.

Science is also a process, although in many cases it has become a modern substitute for religion and for philosophy as well. A lot of people does not like to hear this but it is a major caveat to keep in mind about science.

Anciently, everyone believed in various pantheons of gods. They also cut up birds and reptiles to see if the entrails were healthy or diseased, and if healthy it was considered a good omen, but if diseased a bad one. The Greeks harken back to 1500 BC with their gods. The Egyptians even further, according to Herodotus.

Then along came the first Greek philosophers around 750 BC and they concluded that all this religious and cult madness was unsound and irrational. The philosophers invented rationality.

Rationality starts from scratch, and then it attempts to explain things with cause and effect observations and inferences. Some of you probably think this is what science is, but on a more fundamental level this is what philosophy does.

Science needs data and observations first. Philosophy is pure human rational though and begins without any data at all.

Galileo was the first true scientist when he pointed his home made telescope at the planet Jupiter and observed 4 satellites revolving around it. This brought him into stark controversy with the Roman Catholic Church (the one that was left over after the Greek Orthodox Church split off from them in 1054 AD) which taught as a dogma that all celestial bodies revolved around the Earth. There were thinkers before Galileo, however they were all mathematicians and none of them compiled any significant observations like Galileo had. Thus I call him the first true scientist.

Prior to Galileo, anyone who used pure human thought instead of religious dogma was called a philosopher.

Philosophy asks questions like "what am I?" and "how can I know?" and "what is truth?" You cannot research these questions for data. You can only think about them in your head and come to conclusions of your own about them. Whereas some major religions have tried to tackle these questions they are only acute forgeries of the centuries of philosophical though that has gone into these fundamental questions.

Most if not all college Philosophy 101 courses start with a book that is a history of philosophy from Thales to the present day. The present day is dominated mostly by British professors of philosophy, like Roger Scruton in England.

So that's the lay of the land, in Philosophy.

For anyone to get started on their own in Philosophy they should get their hands on any history of philosophy book. My favorite is Bertrand Russell's 1945 edition of "The History Of Western Philosophy." Russell starts with Thales, as do all such authors writing such a book. This unfortunately leaves out Hesiod, although many of Aristotle's quotes originate with Hesiod. Although atheist himself, Russell does a pretty good job of covering the evolution of religious philosophy as well, which in modern philosophy is normally not discussed.

Freemasons are famous for coining the proverb that no one should discuss politics or religion openly. This notion among the Freemasons evolved in the 17th Century A.D. when Freemasonry was being codified in England and Scotland after having fled France and Germany. Since England and Scotland were a tapestry of various Christian sects, they needed a general rule to keep sectarianism in its black box. And politics was a game of princes and dukes assassinating each other for power over the realm, so that was not a safe topic of conversation either. In order to meet in lodges in the highest hills and lowest vales with some semblance of peace and accord, the Freemasons made topics of politics or religion taboo.

Anciently however, religion was an opiate of the masses in which everyone worshipped the king or pharaoh as either a god himself or a son of a god or his messenger or representative on Earth. The Greeks were the same as the Egyptians on this, and there were many Athenian ostracisms over impiety towards the Greek gods, and even Socrates was told to drink hemlock or flee Athens over his own teachings about the futility of Greek religion and its pantheon. He chose to stay at Athens and drink the poison instead. He considered a happy death among his beloved friends and family better than a lonely life as an exile.

Thales and his followers and the various schools of philosophy that followed after them were not fooled by the incantations of ancient Greek religion. They came up with other theories instead. And they taught them to others, mostly far away from Athens, which was a major naval and colonial power with courts and judges with the power of life or death at home in Attica.

One by one the major philosophers were forced to flee Athens or suffer the same fate as Socrates.

Ergo philosophy has always been controversial.

It seems that anytime anyone has sat down and tried to think for themselves, and then express it, that they peeve someone else who then tries to kill or ostracize them.

Besides Russell and Scruton, there are several other modern authors of philosophy. One of my favorites is James Mannion and his book "Essentials Of Philosophy" in which he also summarizes Native American Philosophy as well. Most of my quotes about Native American Philosophy come from Mannion's works.

http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1582537.ESSENTIALS_OF_PHILOSOPHY


----------



## Karl (Aug 14, 2016)

There is probably a word limit in this forum too, so I need to split up this thread into several smaller ones.

When it stops letting me edit my first post I will add on below.

I will also break after certain citations and links to emphasize them and encourage their study.


----------



## Karl (Aug 14, 2016)

Aristotle was a great thinker who eclipsed all of his predecessors even Plato, and was not himself eclipsed until Descartes.

Aristotle noticed that the Sophists -- who were like corporate lawyers of our modern times -- used tricks of rhetoric (Sophistry) to fool their listeners into voting their own way during elections and trials.

So Aristotle made a list of what he called "fallacies". Aristotle's list started out very small and was mostly a survey of what the Sophists were doing in Athens.

Since then modern collegiate forensic debate societies have expanded the list until now it is extensive.

Everyone should become aware of these fallacies and make sure not to use them in their own thinking. It is also unethical to use them in your own speech as well, unless you want to prove that you are either ignorant of them or else you are willing to confess that you are merely being deceitful.

Here is Wiki's list of them. If you don't like Wiki then you can google Stanford University and reference their list, however the Stanford philosophy website has a virus on it possibly put there by someone from M.I.T. so buyer beware. Wiki is at least safe:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies


----------



## Karl (Aug 14, 2016)

Once you have read the introductory books on philosophy and studied the list of fallacies, then you can begin to develop your own personal philosophy.

Doing so frees your mind from all the acquired brainwashing that we each have been taught since our childhoods by our parents, our ministers, our teachers, our professors, our employers, the media, and the various governments that have bureaucratically ruled over us since we were born.

Once you get good yourself at spotting fallacies, particularly emotional arguments that have no basis in rationality, you will laugh when you hear them spoken by politicians and their minions of cheerleaders, and your mind will be free to think on its own.

This alone makes it worth studying philosophy even if completely on your own.

Read enough and eventually a light will go on in your mind on its own.

I think you will like that because then you will be free.

Thinking -- pure rationality -- will have made you free.


----------



## Karl (Aug 14, 2016)

Of all the philosophers, Rene Descartes is my favorite because he has taught everyone else how to start out in philosophy on their own.

You cannot just jump into Cartesian (that's what it's called) philosophy right away however. You first must read through the history of philosophy to gain an understanding of its evolution in the literature from Thales to Descartes.

Descartes essentially said -- to himself -- "I don't believe anything that I have heard or been taught -- so I am going to start all over on my own."

He then locked himself in a large oven, closing the door, and in the darkness started completely from scratch.

What am I and what am I not?

What is real and what is not?

Am I awake or am I asleep? And which is which?

How can I know?

Ultimately he came to only one conclusion -- that he was indeed thinking.

Since he was thinking, and thoughts were being created, then someone must exist who was doing the thinking.

"I think, therefore I am" was his first indisputable finding of fact.

With that, he alone dashed to pieces all the hundreds of years of skepticism that the Skeptics had launched. No one can doubt that they are themselves thinking. Therefore no one can logically or reasonably doubt that they themselves exist.

This was a milestone in philosophical though. No one had ever done this before.

Ergo Descartes is a pioneer in rational philosophical though and the assassin of skepticism.


----------



## Karl (Aug 14, 2016)

John Locke, George Berkeley, and David Hume framed what is now called "British Empiricism" during the 17th and 18th Centuries, which is a practical minded branch of philosophy that was subsequently responsible for the American colonists (mostly the very rich ones) to question and doubt "the divine right of kings" and to rebel from their own English king, George the 3rd.

It evolved into political philosophy, which we now call political science, and it led to the formation of an American democratic republic and certain separation of powers within it. All American school children are taught about the separation of powers between the Federal legislature (called a Congress), the Federal Administration (called a Presidency), and a Federal judiciary (with a US Supreme Court and various subordinate courts of appellate review).

I do not want to talk about politics at all. However philosophy has had a major impact on government and on politics over the past 250 years with the American and the French Revolutions and the subsequent spread of parliamentary democracy around most of the world (except of course Arabia, China, and North Korea).

This is a clear example of the power of philosophy which allows thinkers who think clearly enough to clean their minds of brainwashing and fallacies that they were taught and were used to before.


----------



## Karl (Aug 14, 2016)

Philosophy has several major branches, one of which is applied ethics.

Applied ethics governs various professions which are licensed in the various states, such as accounting, law, medicine, and so forth.

Practical ethics or universal ethics is something similar which applies to all intelligent thinking peoples in their various walks of life.

At the extreme, violations of practical ethics can result in fraud charges in criminal or civil court. Criminal court is where the government prosecutes you for something that you did which is viewed to be very wrong. Civil court is where another citizen drags you into court for something similar against him or her personally.

That's what modern ethics are. Ethics can be and often are very powerful.

At the very least your neighbors and family might all hate you because of your lack of ethics and your exploitations of them and others.

Ok now we are ready for "hunting ethics."

That will be another thread.


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

.


----------



## Dunkem (May 8, 2012)

LT are you out there?


----------



## Karl (Aug 14, 2016)

Dunkem said:


> LT are you out there?


Who pray tell is LT ?


----------



## Dunkem (May 8, 2012)

My philosopher


----------



## Karl (Aug 14, 2016)

Dunkem said:


> My philosopher


As in "Dog is my co-pilot" ?


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

Dunkem said:


> LT are you out there?


Be careful... you say his name 3 times in a row and he will be summoned here.

-DallanC


----------



## wyogoob (Sep 7, 2007)

Please, someone, cut my wrists.

.


----------



## Idratherbehunting (Jul 17, 2013)

DallanC said:


>


This is deep. Very insightful. I actually just finished a slice of pie. Thank you.


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

Everything is better with Pie.


-DallanC


----------



## Karl (Aug 14, 2016)

wyogoob said:


> Please, someone, cut my wrists.
> 
> .


Hmm ... so Dog is NOT your co-pilot then ?!


----------



## Dunkem (May 8, 2012)

Karl said:


> Hmm ... so Dog is NOT your co-pilot then ?!


 Who are you addressing ? Goob or me? And who is dog?


----------



## Karl (Aug 14, 2016)

Dunkem said:


> Who are you addressing ? Goob or me? And who is dog?


D-O-G is G-O-D spelled backwards.

Haven't you seen the bumper stickers?

It is a sectarian play on words.

Another one like that which I have seen is:

"Captain Morgan is my Captain."


----------



## wyogoob (Sep 7, 2007)

Please, only post pictures smaller than a tennis court.

thanks

This is my favorite thread.

.


----------



## wyogoob (Sep 7, 2007)

Karl said:


> D-O-G is G-O-D spelled backwards.
> 
> Haven't you seen the bumper stickers?
> 
> ...


Cool beans. I was at the Louisville Downs when Sectarian won the Kentucky Derby, 1979.

Uh....top of da page.

.


----------



## Loke (Sep 7, 2007)

DallanC said:


> .


That reminds me, I've got some apple crisp to finish. Fresh organic (that means you need to cut around the worms) Fuji apples. Quite tasty if I say so myself.


----------



## Dunkem (May 8, 2012)

Karl said:


> D-O-G is G-O-D spelled backwards.
> 
> Haven't you seen the bumper stickers?
> 
> ...


 Nah, have not seen that one, but they keep me in the house most of the time.*\\-\\*


----------



## johnnycake (Jul 19, 2011)

Personally, I prefer not to delve into the soliloquies of philosophic panderings. I'm not one to sit and watch the mental masturbatory antics of self-professed gasconaders as they quietly scream at the penumbrae of societal flaws. 

No, no. Why do that when I can be in the hills, chasing cottontail rabbits until they trap themselves under a rock? Then I can reach in the crevice, gently grab them behind the head, and hold them in the palm of my hand and softly stroke their ears until their heart beat calms down and they relax. That is a perfect moment in nature, and the best time to crush their skull with your barehands to ensure the meat isn't stressed with adrenaline. The amount of flex in those thin bones is impressive, but that satisfying crunch and accompanying dislocation of the eyeballs from their sockets is more soothing than a mother's lullaby.


----------



## middlefork (Nov 2, 2008)

johnnycake said:


> Personally, I prefer not to delve into the soliloquies of philosophic panderings. I'm not one to sit and watch the mental masturbatory antics of self-professed gasconaders as they quietly scream at the penumbrae of societal flaws.


+1 :shock:


----------



## Karl (Aug 14, 2016)

johnnycake said:


> Personally, I prefer not to delve into the soliloquies of philosophic panderings. I'm not one to sit and watch the mental masturbatory antics of self-professed gasconaders as they quietly scream at the penumbrae of societal flaws.
> 
> No, no. Why do that when I can be in the hills, chasing cottontail rabbits until they trap themselves under a rock? Then I can reach in the crevice, gently grab them behind the head, and hold them in the palm of my hand and softly stroke their ears until their heart beat calms down and they relax. That is a perfect moment in nature, and the best time to crush their skull with your barehands to ensure the meat isn't stressed with adrenaline. The amount of flex in those thin bones is impressive, but that satisfying crunch and accompanying dislocation of the eyeballs from their sockets is more soothing than a mother's lullaby.


Philosophy is great during the down time.

And it will free your mind.


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

-DallanC


----------



## martymcfly73 (Sep 17, 2007)




----------



## Bax* (Dec 14, 2008)

What did I just read?


----------



## johnnycake (Jul 19, 2011)

A window into the abyss.


----------

