One studied philosophy. One threw one's hands in the air, screaming "it's all so conflicted, random and cold!" One became an apathetic, damaging, selfish...psychopathic?....runt. Answers on a postcard...in parting: philosophy graduates, I've known a few..

An education in section 100 of the Dewey Decimal system might well end there. It's certainly the case that many with a smattering of education in philosophy (which includes quite a long way beyond doing even a doctorate) know oodles about the contents of such-and-such an ISBN number except why we still talk about the author. Worse, many of them think such-and-such an author was actually correct!

What they don't get, the real hidden secret, is this; none of them had a clue of what they were on about, In fact, we don't remember them for what they said, which was often unadulterated bollocks, but because of what they taught us about thinking.

And that's what most philosophy students don't get. You're not supposed to learn what they thought, but HOW they thought, and how we've moved on.

Keep It Real wrote:One studied philosophy. One threw one's hands in the air, screaming "it's all so conflicted, random and cold!" One became an apathetic, damaging, selfish...psychopathic?....runt. Answers on a postcard...in parting: philosophy graduates, I've known a few..

Do you have any particular branch(es) of philosophy in mind?

Aesthetics?
Ethics?
Epistemology?
Metaphysics?
Logic?
Mind and language?
Philosophy of science?
Political philosophy?
Philosophy of religion?
Metaphilosophy?

Any particular strand(s)?

Western philosophy?
Middle Eastern philosophy?
Eastern philosophy?
African philosophy?
Indigenous American philosophy?
Women in philosophy?
Philosophical progress?

hackenslash wrote:An education in section 100 of the Dewey Decimal system might well end there. It's certainly the case that many with a smattering of education in philosophy (which includes quite a long way beyond doing even a doctorate) know oodles about the contents of such-and-such an ISBN number except why we still talk about the author. Worse, many of them think such-and-such an author was actually correct!

What they don't get, the real hidden secret, is this; none of them had a clue of what they were on about, In fact, we don't remember them for what they said, which was often unadulterated bollocks, but because of what they taught us about thinking.

And that's what most philosophy students don't get. You're not supposed to learn what they thought, but HOW they thought, and how we've moved on.

Except they didn't really teach you how to think, they just read you their thoughts. It's pretty much just a bunch of opinions flying back and forth without any ability to prove anything. IF anything is learned from studying it is how pointless the exercise and practice is.

Frozenworld wrote:

hackenslash wrote:An education in section 100 of the Dewey Decimal system might well end there. It's certainly the case that many with a smattering of education in philosophy (which includes quite a long way beyond doing even a doctorate) know oodles about the contents of such-and-such an ISBN number except why we still talk about the author. Worse, many of them think such-and-such an author was actually correct!

What they don't get, the real hidden secret, is this; none of them had a clue of what they were on about, In fact, we don't remember them for what they said, which was often unadulterated bollocks, but because of what they taught us about thinking.

And that's what most philosophy students don't get. You're not supposed to learn what they thought, but HOW they thought, and how we've moved on.

Except they didn't really teach you how to think, they just read you their thoughts. It's pretty much just a bunch of opinions flying back and forth without any ability to prove anything. IF anything is learned from studying it is how pointless the exercise and practice is.

/point and laugh

Doing all that hard learning shit is pointless when you can just contrive sentences which the act of writing thereby decrees reality... or at least, you think you can do that. Meanwhile, credible, competent people find such hubris absurd, self-serving and woefully ignorant.

Frozenworld wrote:Except they didn't really teach you how to think,

They may not have taught YOU how to think. It's pretty much a tautology that nobody ever did at this point.

they just read you their thoughts.

This isn't possible on your purported worldview.

It's pretty much just a bunch of opinions flying back and forth

This isn't possible on your purported worldview.

without any ability to prove anything.

This isn't possible on your purported worldview. In fact, it isn't possible to prove anything at all on your worldview, other than that your worldview is fucking stupid.

IF anything is learned from studying it is how pointless the exercise and practice is.

Learning isn't possible on your worldview. Knowledge isn't possible on your worldview. A point isn't possible on your worldview.

Are you beginning to see a pattern yet?

There's a reason no serious thinker wastes more than thirty seconds on solipsism.