What is philosophy? When is philosophy ‘real’ and not pseudo? This question has troubled me for some years. I have been a student and an academic and a lecturer. I have studied philosophy, discoursed about philosophy, published in it, taught it, defended it, and sold it. In all this philosophical activity, I certainly looked like a philosopher. I had doubts…
The ‘Noseeum’ Value of Philosophy
It’s quite common for people who do not understand philosophy to say that philosophy is a discipline with little to no value. It trains you for nothing, it teaches us nothing, it serves no purpose. In contrast, it’s also quite common for philosophers (i.e., people who do understand philosophy) to say that philosophy is of the highest value, ranking amongst the most important things a person can do. ‘The unexamined life is not worthy of a human being’, they will say. And some of them will really mean it…
In our education system, the vast majority of students will never study philosophy at all. The first opportunity to learn philosophy might come when young people are 16 or 17, but it depends on their school. They normally have at most two years before they will study this at higher education, if they choose. But it is already too late…
Philosophers have been moaning about this for decades. The introduction and increase of student fees accelerated the process, but it started in the 80s when the people who run universities settled on two measures of success for any degree programme (besides brute profitability): student satisfaction and employability. Both measures are driven by marketing, which is in turn driven by the need to compete with one another for student numbers. Promise prospective students that they will enjoy the course and have a good time and they are more likely to choose to come to you. Promise them that they will get a good job from their degree and earn lots of money and they, and more importantly their parents, are much more likely to choose to come to you…
Popular practical philosophy is held back by a general ignorance. There are lots of people talking about things that they manifestly don’t understand. Since they all talk to each other, no one is in any position to know any better; but since no one knows this, hierarchies emerge, because the blind can lead the blind if only they brag about seeing…
Stoicism is very popular nowadays and is being sold from all corners as the solution to all your problems, but this is because most people who are selling Stoicism don’t seem to understand what it is or what they are. They are not Stoics. They are actors; they are children playing at dressing up, so lost in their game of make believe that they have forgotten to go to school…
The Simulation Argument, in its popular form that asserts we have good reason to believe we are living in a computer simulation, is a fine example of pseudo-philosophy. It’s a good example because in order to understand why it is pseudo-philosophy, not real philosophy, you need to understand a bit about the key developments in the history of philosophy that informed our philosophy of science. That is, you need to understand enough philosophy to know what you are talking about…
Philosophical pessimism, in contrast to the colloquial use of the term, is not a negative prediction for the future. Philosophical pessimism is the belief that life is a bad bet, overall; the belief that it would have been better to have never been born. It is as much a judgement about the past as it is about the future. It stands opposed to philosophical optimism, which is the belief that life is a good bet, overall. The question is simple: are we glad we exist? A pessimist says no; an optimist says yes…
Pessimism, in the philosophical sense, is the belief that life is a bad bet, overall; that it would be better to have never been born. Many philosophers have held this belief, understanding it to be the correct inference from the available evidence: if you weigh up the balance of happiness and suffering in the world, you will find that suffering tips the scales to its end. Some would argue that it is not a fine balance: the scales of the universe are clearly and overwhelmingly tipped towards suffering. On this basis, only a fool would say that we are better off for being here. I have held this view for most of my life…
A Philosopher’s Lessons from Chronic Illness
1. Accept that people will not understand. 2. Do not lose yourself. 3. Know thyself. 4. Align yourself with your nature. 5. Live by your own judgement. 6. Learn philosophy.
Accept that people will not understand. Do not expect it; do not ask for it. Ask only for acceptance. Don’t blame them for their lack of understanding. It’s not their fault that they don’t understand because they are not able to understand. People can only judge things as they seem to them, and what you can see is limited to what you are able to see. A silent movie means nothing to a blind man. Most people do not understand what it is like to have a chronic illness because they cannot understand such a thing…
There is an old philosophical simile that says: we are in this life like a sentry at their post. The underlying thought is that we have a moral duty not to commit suicide. I have always found it to be a provocative and challenging thought. Over time, I have come to question the militaristic connotations of the ‘sentry’. It implies that life is like a battle and we have a duty to fight it, but I don’t think we should assume that life must be like a battle and that living is only ever fighting…
In Ancient Greek philosophy, farming was a go-to example of an activity whose value was determined by its product. I think farming is confused about its activity. I think it is torn between two ideas of itself: one poiesis, the other praxis. It used to be obvious that the value of farming was determined by its product: farming is the activity (poiesis) of producing food. Nowadays it seems that as much time and money is spent on the doing of things or the doing of things in a certain way (praxis), sometimes regardless of the product…
Farming and the Value of Reputation
British farming stands at a post-Brexit crossroads. One road leads us away from Europe, towards the international markets and the cut-throat competition thereof. The other leads us back to Europe, towards a continued alignment with EU-dictated regulation. Our government must make a choice. Neither option seems to me to be very promising. I think there is an alternative option, one that sees us blaze a trail in a new and distinctive direction. This direction is to prioritise ethics at the expense of productivity. We should aim to be world-leaders in reputation…
tobybetenson.com 