Skip to main content

Why I Love Philosophy

 You love something when that something gives meaning to your life. And if I may say so philosophy is the most meaningful activity of life. Without philosophy who are we? We get a job to survive in the world, have kids, make money that we would never really get to use and the same routine in and out of office goes on for years until we grow weak and our infirmity prevents further activity. That is when we stop and start thinking what was the meaning of all this. Only when we realize we are mortal and things may end soon for us that we begin to take stock of life to see how our life has been.

The problem is all our life we have done something for the sake of gaining something else. But we have not done anything for the sake of itself. When we turn back we realize that our most happiest period has been our childhood where we have no achievements to show for yet we were happy.

Philosophy is meaningful because it breaks us from a mechanical pattern - it allows you to be more than just a machine. It gives you independence - you can think for yourself independently of what others say; not yielding to existing fashions if your considered belief is that they are wrong and neither you need to be bothered by their impractical sense of practicality. It gives you an intellectual and emotional discipline to think correctly and rationally even when your emotions tend to distort your perception - allowing you to keep your head even when others are losing theirs.

Philosophy is an attempt to understand the meaning and significance of life - why things are the way they are. You may fall short of the ideal of truth - but in philosophy the means are as important - if not more than - the end. It is no use to end up with the right position if you do not do so for the right reasons. It is not always about the destination it is also about the journey.

Philosophy also gives me the feeling of being in conversation with the best minds of the world. It is an ongoing dialogue which probably began with the beginning of mankind itself - to understand and comprehend the significance of our world - to which you get the chance of contributing. Being smitten with the love of philosophy is probably the best thing that can happen to someone. Philosophy is concern about a good life - a life of reason and proportion; a life where we can truly be happy.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Ramanuja and Nimbarka

  The primary question for any Vedanta philosophy is what is the relation between Brahman and the world and Brahman and the individual souls. Nimbarka takes this relation to be one of identity and difference. He gives the analogy of a coiled snake and of sun and its rays. Brahman is both immanent and transcendent; the souls and matter are really just the different manifest states of the one Brahman. The concern with such a philosophy is to show that the immanence of Brahman does not compromise its unity and the impurities that accrue to the soul and matter do not thereby affect Brahman. Ramanuja believes that this is not possible in the Bheda-Abheda system (his criticisms of Bhaskara would with certain modifications apply also to Nimbarka). The reason is identity and difference cannot be affirmed simultaneously of the same object. Identity is an absolute relation or in the logical terminology of Nyaya it is a locus pervading relation. In terms of Modern Logic identity is a reflexiv...
Post a Comment
Read more

Leibniz And Locke

  In NE 290, Leibniz objects that there is no precise way to determine what a particular is, for him a particular is at once an individual thing and connected to a whole series of monads which connexion is essential to being a particular. Hence he says in order to understand a particular entity we will have to understand an entire infinity (since all attributes are essential to a substance and given its connexion of harmony with infinite monads, by Identity of Indiscernibles this result follows). Here we should note that Locke believes that we know a particular Idea by the testimony of our consciousness but Leibniz too believes that senses bear testimony to a system of particulars whose harmony we find in the thinking subject. Leibniz further says that abstraction proceeds from species to genera and not from individuals to species. So the question comes down to this: a) Can there be a particular without species? and b) Can a particular be known without knowing the species it belong...
Post a Comment
Read more

Moving Beyond The Right Wing - Left Wing Dichotomy

Moving Beyond The Right Wing — Left Wing Dichotomy I would like to make the argument that the right-left dichotomy is a false one and that they share many things in common and so we need to get past them both. Overtly, the difference of right and left consists in this — the right believes that history of a particular group of people is special and determines the identity and the values of that group of people and this history cannot be overturned. They agree with enlightenment that reason cannot ground religion and tradition, we cannot prove many things that are nevertheless still valuable to us and so reason is not sovereign. Some things have a sentimental value and they are not the less if no proof of them is forthcoming. The split between right and left can be traced back to the period of enlightenment when Pascal reacted against Descartes’s rationalism by arguing that religion is grounded in the ‘heart’ and not in reason. Pietism inspired by this line of thought emphasizes personal...
Post a Comment
Read more