Philosophy’s main purpose is to understand man, his values, his quests, lusts and thirsts for knowledge and quench this thirst. Philosophy’s shortcoming is however that it can hardly understand itself let alone understand the man.
Leave aside the colorful palette of multiple gnosis and the rich offer of explanations that have the clarity of jungle lianas, philosophy cheats the young brains by pretending it is here to offer answers about the existence of human beings; that its sole purpose is to enlighten us.
The painful and naked truth is that philosophy doesn’t step up to its metaphysical and pretentious plate. Philosophy is purely a gathering of conundrums for a chosen few. Even though considered - and no one denies or detracts this, - man’s ultimate intellectual refinement, it is not something everybody can joggle with. Philosophy ultimately claims that it does not demolish citadels, it does not destroy certainties, it does not tarnish faiths, and it does not kill idols. However, it does throne answerless questions, unquestioning agreements, while promoting false idols advancing hocus-pocusing hypothesis for the sake of logorrhea.
What is even more amazing about philosophy is the totalitarian request that it should be applied by everyone with no restrains, that human values are at stake, which is mankind’s ultimate knowledgeable achievement. No other science has this absurd and condescending pretension. Oh, right, but this is maybe philosophy is not actually a science.
I am not philosophy’s stone caster; I don’t dismiss it because I consider it an abstract, lifeless topic with an odd terminology, a futile and gratuitous game of a bored human mind, whose futility is directly proportional with the uncertainty of its theoretical and practical findings.
I dismiss philosophy because it is a lie and because as a practitioner of complete freedom, with everything what freedom entails, I consider philosophy brings nothing practical while promotes and encourages doubts, fake semi gods, and futile observations about life and man, engulfing and sucking dry all the joy one would have, should have not encounter it.
I believe that while pretending to help mankind discover its true values, morality and genuine self, philosophy brings nothing instead, depleting man’s natural inclination toward happiness and transforming it into a monument dedicated to unhappiness, doubt, depression, sadness and uncertainty, without answering any question or offering any feasible or viable solution as per how virtuous a moral living should be.
History proved so far that man’s development was so far due to scientific, economic, medical discoveries, which perfectly applied to pragmatism. Mankind evolved because it was practical and searched for practical solutions and achieved a state of happiness due to its economic welfare rather than intellectual findings such as “cogito ergo sum”.
To paraphrase a philosopher, philosophy is for the weak, not at all for the Ubermensch. None of these persons has brought up a feasible or practical contribution to the world’s development or welfare.
I am not an immoralist and my intention is not to demolish a system of moral values, but to emphasize the uselessness of philosophy dogmas. I am rather an amoralist from this point of view and I am certain that people who have never heard about philosophy have moral values as well. How many of philosophy’s parishioners are genuinely moral people? Isn’t philosophy’s primordial rule that one should practice what one preaches?
Callicles summed it up amazingly well in Socrates’ Gorgias “it seems to me a ridiculous thing, Socrates, that a man that reached maturity is still (into) philosophy. Philosophy is demeaning for an older man”.
Indeed philosophy should remain what once was: a topic of study for young Werters who got unlucky in love or for the hormonal and vivacious minds of gymnasium boys, who between wrestling matches can challenge themselves to an intellectual ping pong about abstracts, God, happiness, moral values, immutables, and plurality of natural objects.
To conclude in philosophy’s endearment terms: “How could what is perish? How could it have come to be? For if it came into being, it is not; nor is it if ever it is going to be. Thus coming into being is extinguished, and destruction unknown” (Parmenides).
God might or might not be dead. Philosophy certainly is. Deal with it.
Additional notes: Now, copy and paste the text into a word doc. Go to Edit, then go to Find What, type in "philosophy" and Replace With "Religion" (or any other set of dogmas that you dislike).
1 comment:
As usual, when attacking somewhat vague targets, a-priori definitions clarify your objective.
Since I can't believe that you consider entire branches of philosophy, such as epistemology, entirely without practical purpose (imagine a world in which nobody has a basic command of critical thinking!), I'll assume you're waxing against religious and philosophical delirium (quotes from Plotinus, Hegel, Focault here), in a defense of intelligibility and common sense against meaninglessness.
Post a Comment