Philosophy is useless?

[taoskin99]

A short definition of philosophy (probably the shortest which isn't a direct translation of it's greek roots) :
the art/discipline of pursuing wisdom.

Wisdom : the knowledge that leads to an improved and rational happiness when used. (wikipedia it for more details)

That being said, is philosophy useless thinking or can a proper use of philosophical theory and thinking can actually make us wiser and allow us to lead a better and happier life?
most importantly, if you agree or not, give examples and arguments!

[moonmeister]

You have a very strange philosophy I must say!

[twotimintim]

IMO philosophy is just arguing ones subjective reality against another.

So the only way philosophy is technically useful by your standard would be to create your own , or to "adopt " on that might "fit" onto your subjective reality.

I prefer examining the objective reality

[Ond]

Originally Posted by twotimintim

IMO philosophy is just arguing ones subjective reality against another.

So the only way philosophy is technically useful by your standard would be to create your own , or to "adopt " on that might "fit" onto your subjective reality.

I prefer examining the objective reality

Pretty much. Moral philosophy shapes your decisions, and collectively society's.

[dal7timgar]

You need to distinguish between philosophy and pseudo-intellectual bullshit.

A lot of people who claim they are talking about philosophy are just spewing useless pseudo-intellectual bullshit. Of course they aren't going to tell you that and will act highly insulted if you accuse them of such. But ultimately they are a boring waste of time.

Beware of the Sophists. There are lots of semantic word games played where you end up arguing about the words instead of what you are supposedly talking about.

DT

[The Methematician]

Originally Posted by dal7timgar

You need to distinguish between philosophy and pseudo-intellectual bullshit.

A lot of people who claim they are talking about philosophy are just spewing useless pseudo-intellectual bullshit. Of course they aren't going to tell you that and will act highly insulted if you accuse them of such. But ultimately they are a boring waste of time.

Beware of the Sophists. There are lots of semantic word games played where you end up arguing about the words instead of what you are supposedly talking about.

DT

Quoted as an example of useless semi-intelected bs from a pseudo-intellectual b-shitter ....

[Ond]

Originally Posted by The Methematician

Quoted as an example of useless semi-intelected bs from a pseudo-intellectual b-shitter ....

Hahaha. He does have a point, though. It's what they call "vain learning."

[dal7timgar]

Originally Posted by The Methematician

Quoted as an example of useless semi-intelected bs from a pseudo-intellectual b-shitter ....

The supposed philosophers have to prove they are good at math or physics before I'll pay attention to their philosophy. Kind of like Bertrand Russell. LOL

DT

[Ond]

Originally Posted by dal7timgar

The supposed philosophers have to prove they are good at math or physics before I'll pay attention to their philosophy. Kind of like Bertrand Russell. LOL

DT

That's the beauty of philosophy in terms of the persuit of wisdom: that unlike the sciences which require that one has knowledge in a particular field, like the mathematicion must be proficient in mathematics for him to be labeled one, philosophers are deemed philosophers only on the basis of their virtue to become wise.

You make a good point though, and I'd emphasize its importance. In regards to natural philosophy, that is inquiry into the physical objects of nature, how do philosophers cope with scientific progress? One almost must to be a scientist to be a natural philosopher, and a natural philosopher that rejects scientific discoveries in his field of inquiry is no more than a theologist.

[alooha from hell]

if you ever wonder about shit, then you are a philosopher.