"The 'practical' man...is one who recognizes only material needs, who realizes that men must have food for the body, but is oblivious of the necessity of providing food for the mind. If all men were well off, if poverty and disease had been reduced to their lowest possible point, there would still remain much to be done to produce a valuable society; and even in the existing world the goods of the mind are at least as valuable as the goods of the body. It is exclusively among the goods of the mind that the value of philosophy is to be found; and only those who are not indifferent to these goods can be persuaded that the study of philosophy is not a waste of time."
-Bertrand Russell, The Problems of Philosophy
"What are you going to do with that?"
-Almost automatic response to the revelation that one studies philosophy (trust me)
Athens, Greece--399 B.C.E.: Socrates is condemned to death for the practice of philosophy. Specific charges against Socrates include being "guilty of wrongdoing in that he busies himself studying things in the sky and below the earth; he makes the worse into the stronger argument, and teaches these same things to others." Socrates gives a vigorous defense of the philosophical life which comes to be immortalized by Plato in the Apology (in Greek, a "justification" or "defense"). Ultimately, Socrates is handed the hemlock due to his unsettling passion for questioning others and his refusal to cease calling others to care for the good of the soul above all else.
Memphis, Tennessee--2008 C.E.: Michael Dean is asked, "What do you do?" Upon answering "I am a philosophy graduate student," Michael Dean is presented with a sharp criticism: "So, basically, you waste your time and ask questions all day." Left with a hemlock-esque bitter taste in his mouth, Michael Dean explains that he disagrees with this characterization of philosophy. However, the question remains in his mind--why are reactions like these so common upon the revelation that one studies philosophy?
After reading these anecdotes you may be asking your self, "Self, is Michael Dean seriously comparing his own experience to that of Socrates'?" I admit, there are striking differences. Although I have been brought to justice for operating my auto (a classy, yet understated '92 Mazda Protege) too quickly, I have never been formally charged by the state for the practice of philosophy. Furthermore, none of my days in court have ended with a sentence of "drink this hemlock." And yet, I feel a kinship with Socrates. Condemnation takes many forms and although Socrates and I are separated both by a number of years and a clear disparity in the severity of our punishment, we share the common bond of being denounced due to a passion for philosophy. It is this common reproach of the philosophical life that has come to interest me, both due to the frequency of its occurrence and the view of philosophy from which it is born.
In The Problems of Philosophy Bertrand Russell presents a similar concern and notes that many are "inclined to doubt whether philosophy is anything better than innocent but useless trifling, hair-splitting distinctions, and controversies on matters concerning which knowledge is impossible." Such a conception of philosophy (or one closely resembling it) may have led to the diatribes noted above. However, construed more broadly, the philosophical life is charged with the crime of being impractical, and thus, use-less. Seen in this light, the question "What are you going to do with that?" carries the implicit criticism that one has chosen a path that does not lead to a practical profession (see business, finance, law, cat whisperer, etc.). It is the perceived failure to be wholly practical which leads to criticisms and, in some cases, outright hostility toward the philosopher.
But are such criticisms valid? We do need to be practical in this life. For example, it is useful to attain a degree in order to get a job. In turn, this job will provide me with money to support myself and my family. If I work hard enough I may even be able to take that vacation to Delaware that has so often occupied my thoughts (Michael Dean fun fact #22: it's the first state!). Faced with these practical considerations a viable defense of the philosophical life is required.
My defense (or "apology" in the Greek sense) hinges on diverging from viewing the world through a purely practical lens. To be sure, it would be absurd to deny the practical elements of life and this is not my intention. However, practicality alone is not a sufficient condition for an excellent human life. Furthermore, no abstract or "out of touch" philosophical argument is required to illustrate this point. Rather, simply take a moment to recall an encounter with the beautiful. Perhaps you encountered beauty in a sunset, a woman or man, or work of art. In any case, all of us have had an encounter with beauty at some point in our lives. Furthermore, we tend to remember many of these experiences, they make an impression on us that does not fade as quickly as the daily tasks that we set out to accomplish. Are these experiences "practical?" Does their primary significance lie in the advancement of our careers? I think not. Rather, these experiences require us to mark a distinction between the "practical" and the "valuable." Although I have granted the importance of practical pursuits in life, I now ask that you consider the necessity of that which is, in a sense, completely use-less (which is not a dirty word), but also immensely valuable. Indeed, goods of infinite value such as love and beauty are recognized as crucial to the excellent human life precisely because they are not practical. Rather, they transcend the "daily grind" composed of use-ful pursuits and are often referred to as extra-ordinary.
It is here that perhaps the most basic value of philosophy can be seen. Rather than ignoring these experiences philosophy calls us to stay put and explore such encounters. I stress, however, that this exploration is not the exclusive activity of the "professional philosopher." On the contrary, the practice of philosophy is found in a discussion between friends, a question quietly asked of the self, or even in the child's wonder culminating in the question, "Why?" (like my nephew, Luke). Although diverse, these experiences are rightly deemed "philosophical" to the extent that one is engaged in an encounter with the unknown. Perhaps this encounter will culminate in a clear answer causing the "unknown" to acquiesce to the "known." However, it is more likely that such questions as "What is the right thing to do?," "What is real love?," and "What should I be doing with my life?," (which, at least to some degree, we all ask of ourselves) will lead us to other questions requiring a continued embrace of the unknown (or, "exploration"). If there is a clear way to distinguish the practical person from the philosopher it may lie in a disparity of interest in undergoing such exploration. While the former finds little time for questions which may not produce use-ful answers, the latter takes them seriously and views them as potential expansions of one's mental or spiritual horizons. To the extent that one views such questions as matters of importance one values an existence which is not purely practical. Seen in this light it is not radical to claim that there is a philosopher in most all of us.
So, in conclusion, if you still want to know what I am going to do with philosophy...well, to be honest, I am already doing it. I am working, writing, and moving about like many others. But I am also constantly reminding myself that these actions alone are not constitutive of the excellent human life. Rather, the practice of philosophy, so often present in the common thought of the unknown and the appreciation of that which is valuable, will be present in such a life.
-Bertrand Russell, The Problems of Philosophy
"What are you going to do with that?"
-Almost automatic response to the revelation that one studies philosophy (trust me)
Athens, Greece--399 B.C.E.: Socrates is condemned to death for the practice of philosophy. Specific charges against Socrates include being "guilty of wrongdoing in that he busies himself studying things in the sky and below the earth; he makes the worse into the stronger argument, and teaches these same things to others." Socrates gives a vigorous defense of the philosophical life which comes to be immortalized by Plato in the Apology (in Greek, a "justification" or "defense"). Ultimately, Socrates is handed the hemlock due to his unsettling passion for questioning others and his refusal to cease calling others to care for the good of the soul above all else.
Memphis, Tennessee--2008 C.E.: Michael Dean is asked, "What do you do?" Upon answering "I am a philosophy graduate student," Michael Dean is presented with a sharp criticism: "So, basically, you waste your time and ask questions all day." Left with a hemlock-esque bitter taste in his mouth, Michael Dean explains that he disagrees with this characterization of philosophy. However, the question remains in his mind--why are reactions like these so common upon the revelation that one studies philosophy?
After reading these anecdotes you may be asking your self, "Self, is Michael Dean seriously comparing his own experience to that of Socrates'?" I admit, there are striking differences. Although I have been brought to justice for operating my auto (a classy, yet understated '92 Mazda Protege) too quickly, I have never been formally charged by the state for the practice of philosophy. Furthermore, none of my days in court have ended with a sentence of "drink this hemlock." And yet, I feel a kinship with Socrates. Condemnation takes many forms and although Socrates and I are separated both by a number of years and a clear disparity in the severity of our punishment, we share the common bond of being denounced due to a passion for philosophy. It is this common reproach of the philosophical life that has come to interest me, both due to the frequency of its occurrence and the view of philosophy from which it is born.
In The Problems of Philosophy Bertrand Russell presents a similar concern and notes that many are "inclined to doubt whether philosophy is anything better than innocent but useless trifling, hair-splitting distinctions, and controversies on matters concerning which knowledge is impossible." Such a conception of philosophy (or one closely resembling it) may have led to the diatribes noted above. However, construed more broadly, the philosophical life is charged with the crime of being impractical, and thus, use-less. Seen in this light, the question "What are you going to do with that?" carries the implicit criticism that one has chosen a path that does not lead to a practical profession (see business, finance, law, cat whisperer, etc.). It is the perceived failure to be wholly practical which leads to criticisms and, in some cases, outright hostility toward the philosopher.
But are such criticisms valid? We do need to be practical in this life. For example, it is useful to attain a degree in order to get a job. In turn, this job will provide me with money to support myself and my family. If I work hard enough I may even be able to take that vacation to Delaware that has so often occupied my thoughts (Michael Dean fun fact #22: it's the first state!). Faced with these practical considerations a viable defense of the philosophical life is required.
My defense (or "apology" in the Greek sense) hinges on diverging from viewing the world through a purely practical lens. To be sure, it would be absurd to deny the practical elements of life and this is not my intention. However, practicality alone is not a sufficient condition for an excellent human life. Furthermore, no abstract or "out of touch" philosophical argument is required to illustrate this point. Rather, simply take a moment to recall an encounter with the beautiful. Perhaps you encountered beauty in a sunset, a woman or man, or work of art. In any case, all of us have had an encounter with beauty at some point in our lives. Furthermore, we tend to remember many of these experiences, they make an impression on us that does not fade as quickly as the daily tasks that we set out to accomplish. Are these experiences "practical?" Does their primary significance lie in the advancement of our careers? I think not. Rather, these experiences require us to mark a distinction between the "practical" and the "valuable." Although I have granted the importance of practical pursuits in life, I now ask that you consider the necessity of that which is, in a sense, completely use-less (which is not a dirty word), but also immensely valuable. Indeed, goods of infinite value such as love and beauty are recognized as crucial to the excellent human life precisely because they are not practical. Rather, they transcend the "daily grind" composed of use-ful pursuits and are often referred to as extra-ordinary.
It is here that perhaps the most basic value of philosophy can be seen. Rather than ignoring these experiences philosophy calls us to stay put and explore such encounters. I stress, however, that this exploration is not the exclusive activity of the "professional philosopher." On the contrary, the practice of philosophy is found in a discussion between friends, a question quietly asked of the self, or even in the child's wonder culminating in the question, "Why?" (like my nephew, Luke). Although diverse, these experiences are rightly deemed "philosophical" to the extent that one is engaged in an encounter with the unknown. Perhaps this encounter will culminate in a clear answer causing the "unknown" to acquiesce to the "known." However, it is more likely that such questions as "What is the right thing to do?," "What is real love?," and "What should I be doing with my life?," (which, at least to some degree, we all ask of ourselves) will lead us to other questions requiring a continued embrace of the unknown (or, "exploration"). If there is a clear way to distinguish the practical person from the philosopher it may lie in a disparity of interest in undergoing such exploration. While the former finds little time for questions which may not produce use-ful answers, the latter takes them seriously and views them as potential expansions of one's mental or spiritual horizons. To the extent that one views such questions as matters of importance one values an existence which is not purely practical. Seen in this light it is not radical to claim that there is a philosopher in most all of us.
So, in conclusion, if you still want to know what I am going to do with philosophy...well, to be honest, I am already doing it. I am working, writing, and moving about like many others. But I am also constantly reminding myself that these actions alone are not constitutive of the excellent human life. Rather, the practice of philosophy, so often present in the common thought of the unknown and the appreciation of that which is valuable, will be present in such a life.
