What kind of philosophy do you enjoy the most?

Ren

Ren

Seeker at heart
MBTI
INFJ
Enneagram
146
Hey guys!

As a massive philosophy fan, and a newbie on this forum, I thought I'd start a conversation about what 'movements' you like most in this most amazing of disciplines.

Are you more into ethics, metaphysics, epistemology, logic, the philosophy of history, aesthetics? Are you most excited by, say, Marxism, Existentialism, Idealism, the Presocratics, the Philosophy of Religion?

Do you like philosophers who lead with insight, like Nietzsche and Wittgenstein? With great rational systems, like Kant and Descartes? Or with a huge heart, like Spinoza and Epictetus?

I want to know all, and I'm really excited to start talking about my life's greatest passion ;)
 
Welcome to the forum @Ren .

Philosophy is indeed a wonderful adventure.
Ren said:
Are you most excited by,
Click to expand...
Protogoras' ideas regarding the Sophists. How sophistry, which was a tutoring/teaching practice, morph'd into Rhetoric within Law and modern Politics. Also, how the masses ended up following Plato, who was more materialistic and hands-on, rather than some of the more open-monded, free-thinkers such as Socrates, Protogoras and others. ;)
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/sophists/

Nice, topic. Thank you.
 
Can I say everything? It's not exactly everything, more like anything.

At the moment I'm obessed with the possible applications of the bricolage as described by Jacques Derrida. It's quite fortunate, because my BA thesis depends on it. At the same time, I got into metacognition and (Neo)jungian Typology-MBTI-Socionics correlations. And recently, I've been reading the Merkabah thread, it goes deeper into metaphysics (what is known under the term) and quantum physics.

I've been wanting to get into physics for a year now, trying to revise what I learnt and to expand my knowledge, and maybe I'll start continuing with biology (esp. genetics, microbiology and molecular biology - then I'll have some chemistry in the mix) and psychology.

I guess I'm going to be busy for the next ten years doing this xD, but I'll probably throw some single philosphical theories in between just to keep it from becoming boring.

Does philology count as well?

Edit: sorry, it went out of bounds a little. I am just as interested in science as philosophy, I can barely keep them apart. I can tell them apart, but I'd like to unify them... eventually.
 
Sandie33 said:
Welcome to the forum @Ren .

Philosophy is indeed a wonderful adventure.

Protogoras' ideas regarding the Sophists. How sophistry, which was a tutoring/teaching practice, morph'd into Rhetoric within Law and modern Politics. Also, how the masses ended up following Plato, who was more materialistic and hands-on, rather than some of the more open-monded, free-thinkers such as Socrates, Protogoras and others. ;)
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/sophists/

Nice, topic. Thank you.
Click to expand...

Wasn't Plato a student of Socrates? I think I have heard something of the sort.
 
Ginny said:
Wasn't Plato a student of Socrates? I think I have heard something of the sort.
Click to expand...

Yes, Ginny :D
Plato's entire work is believed to have survived intact for over 2,400 years. ... Along with his teacher, Socrates, and his most famous student, Aristotle, Plato laid the very foundations of Western philosophy and science.

However, Socrates was removed, (because he was found guilty of corrupting the youth of Athens, and sentence to death by drinking poison Hemlock), from the School and the way was then paved for Plato's schools of philosophy and science.

From a philosophical stand point, I believe Plato and his successors steered scholars away from the path of metaphysics and thus delayed our scientific progress, but that's just my opinion :P
 
Sandie33 said:
Yes, Ginny :D
Plato's entire work is believed to have survived intact for over 2,400 years. ... Along with his teacher, Socrates, and his most famous student, Aristotle, Plato laid the very foundations of Western philosophy and science.

However, Socrates was removed, (because he was found guilty of corrupting the youth of Athens, and sentence to death by drinking poison Hemlock), from the School and the way was then paved for Plato's schools of philosophy and science.

From a philosophical stand point, I believe Plato and his successors steered scholars away from the path of metaphysics and thus delayed our scientific progress, but that's just my opinion :p
Click to expand...

Somehow this makes me wish I'd paid more attention in Ancient Greek (I had to translate an excerpt from the Apology of Socrates for a philology contest, written by Plato, but anyway...) in my last or penultimate year of attainting the graecum in school. But honestly, I don't think I would have managed to understand it back then. I feel like studying at university opened my mind and I learnt how to think for the first time.

Seems then I have to add revising Ancient Greek and Latin to the list, to properly reclaim knowledge I didn't get when I had the chance.
 
Sandie33 said:
Welcome to the forum @Ren .

Philosophy is indeed a wonderful adventure.

Protogoras' ideas regarding the Sophists. How sophistry, which was a tutoring/teaching practice, morph'd into Rhetoric within Law and modern Politics. Also, how the masses ended up following Plato, who was more materialistic and hands-on, rather than some of the more open-monded, free-thinkers such as Socrates, Protogoras and others. ;)
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/sophists/

Nice, topic. Thank you.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the kind words! I am glad to see that we share this passion, and look forward to more exchanges.

It's great to hear you're so interested in the Sophists. I believe the thought of Protagoras has experienced somewhat of a resurgence in the discipline in recent years. It sounds almost like you're more interested in the history of philosophy, would that be fair?

To call Plato's philosophy materialistic is quite brave! Do you have particular dialogues in mind that suggest this materialism to you? Personally I think I would follow Nietzsche here, and consider Plato to have been the architect of the hidden worlds. The idea of a Platonic Form is very abstract... don't you think?

One last thought coming to mind for now: the heart of Plato's crusade against Protagoras, I believe, would have been to condemn the latter's saying that 'Man is the measure of all things' as the basis for a dangerous kind of epistemological skepticism, which we could actually relate to the way in which rhetoric these days is sometimes used to manipulate with a goal in mind, regardess of the truth. How would you meet Plato's challenge? ;)
 
Last edited:
Ginny said:
Can I say everything? It's not exactly everything, more like anything.

At the moment I'm obessed with the possible applications of the bricolage as described by Jacques Derrida. It's quite fortunate, because my BA thesis depends on it. At the same time, I got into metacognition and (Neo)jungian Typology-MBTI-Socionics correlations. And recently, I've been reading the Merkabah thread, it goes deeper into metaphysics (what is known under the term) and quantum physics.

I've been wanting to get into physics for a year now, trying to revise what I learnt and to expand my knowledge, and maybe I'll start continuing with biology (esp. genetics, microbiology and molecular biology - then I'll have some chemistry in the mix) and psychology.

I guess I'm going to be busy for the next ten years doing this xD, but I'll probably throw some single philosphical theories in between just to keep it from becoming boring.

Does philology count as well?

Edit: sorry, it went out of bounds a little. I am just as interested in science as philosophy, I can barely keep them apart. I can tell them apart, but I'd like to unify them... eventually.
Click to expand...
Hi Ginny! Of course you can say anything :) In fact, I staunchy believe that this is the most philosophical stance there can be.

Philology definitely counts, Nietzsche got his PhD in philology, and eventually became one of the greatest (in my opinion) modern philosophers. I think where philology becomes really interesting for philosophy is for how it intersects with the philosophy of language. It's not always the sexiest area for a non specialist of philosophy, as it can get quite technical and offers no complete system, but I am personally fascinated by it.

"I can't tell them apart, but I'd like to unify them". I see a lot of Ni beauty in this goal ^^ In 'my philosophy' I try to unify phenomenology and monism. Kind of abstract, I know. If you had to think of what differentiates science from philosophy, what would you say it is? Do you think they're synonymous?

I'd love to hear more about bricolage, I came across the concept a good few times in Levi-Strauss but I haven't engaged with it since.
 
Ren said:
I'd love to hear more about bricolage, I came across the concept a good few times in Levi-Strauss but I haven't engaged with it since.
Click to expand...

I have mainly read about it in Derrida's criticism towards Lévi-Strauss. He described it as a movement as opposed to a restictive, closed and centre-controlled structure. You can find the paper here, if you want to take a peek.
 
Ginny said:
I have mainly read about it in Derrida's criticism towards Lévi-Strauss. He described it as a movement as opposed to a restictive, closed and centre-controlled structure. You can find the paper here, if you want to take a peek.
Click to expand...
Thanks so much for sharing that! I'll have a look at it later, when I can give it the time it deserves.

Edit: haha, I thought it was your own article. No problem, I still look forward to reading some Jacques.
 
Ren said:
Thanks for the kind words! I am glad to see that we share this passion, and look forward to more exchanges.

It's great to hear you're so interested in the Sophists. I believe the thought of Protagoras has experienced somewhat of a resurgence in the discipline in recent years. It sounds almost like you're more interested in the history of philosophy, would that be fair?

To call Plato's philosophy materialistic is quite brave! Do you have particular dialogues in mind that suggest this materialism to you? Personally I think I would follow Nietzsche here, and consider Plato to have been the architect of the hidden worlds. The idea of a Platonic Form is very abstract... don't you think?

One last thought coming to mind for now: the heart of Plato's crusade against Protagoras, I believe, would have been to condemn the latter's saying that 'Man is the measure of all things' as the basis for a dangerous kind of epistemological skepticism, which we could actually relate to the way in which rhetoric these days is sometimes used to manipulate with a goal in mind, regardess of the truth. How would you meet Plato's challenge? ;)
Click to expand...
Hi Ren,
Yes, indeed, I lean more toward the History of Philosophy. With the reasoning of where the forefathers' intent of their teachings fall in relation to Modern Philosophy after these teachings had been filtered through the minds of many. To decide for myself if the teachings evolved or have been polutted/perverted, (rhetoric ;)), from the original intent. I'll need to ponder a bit on your questions. For now, I'll give you pause for thought too on the tidbit of...
Ren said:
'Man is the measure of all things'
Click to expand...
My personal belief is this is true...however, I also believe that this was removed from the abstract thought intended, and squeezed into the literal box of black and white thinking. For example, do we as "man" not create laws, rules and cultures as a way to maintain external orders within the physicsl realm of living out the human life? But, what of mans internal life? Does s/he not contemplate personal investment into how s/he not only tackles their own physical experience, but also guage the measure of what personal success, master of thought and emotion, etc. are and thusly hold personal choice in how to tackle their internal landscape of experiences? Which in this regard is altitude of knowledge. I believe this view of "Man is the measure of all things" is more toward what the originating statement and meaning was intended. Translated, We Humans are governance of our own Self while we navigate the governance of our state, we humans have CHOICE. How we 'measure' life is in the end up to the individuals choice ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top