You’re here because you like philosophy. Why don’t you do it for a living? Some of you enjoy it as a hobby but would hate doing it for a living. Some of you would love to do it for a living, but didn’t take the career path when you were younger, and now you’re entrenched in whatever it is you do. Others would love to do it for a living but didn’t have the capacity.
Why aren’t you a professional philosopher? Or a professional writer, scientist, or a professional thinker of some other type? Be specific.
Well, in my case, I took a different professional path that led me to someplace I didn’t really want to be. After that, I created my own profession and played that out. Now, being retired, if I could find a profession that actually payed for me to analysis the rationale of their efforts, I would certainly take it, but I seriously doubt that such a job is open for someone with my particular resume. So in the mean time, I am looking for a means to write a book on certain critical subjects. Not being a writer, it isn’t easy, but having to play with word choices in forums like this helps to clarify some wording and focus issues.
I am, at this point, a professional writer. I write (most of) a small magazine that you have never heard of. I have written for pay on a part time basis before.
I’m not a professional philosopher because I don’t like the academic life. My uncle was a college dean, my aunt was on the faculty of a small bible college and I come from a family of educators, so i know a little about it.
The overwhelming majority of my classmates in school took copious notes and tried hard to pass their tests. And they understood almost nothing about philosophy. Very few people do. I wasn’t looking forward to “teaching” kids like this.
I have told this story before. On another board site, we had a poster who claimed to be a pro. I’m quite sure he was - long story short, I did some research. He was a logician. We had a formal debate. He made mincemeat of himself in no time. I could say I defeated him, but he defeated himself with a huge contradiction that he could not resolve. I knew he wouldn’t resolve it from the start - it was patently obvious. He didn’t know until I pointed it out to him.
To be fair, he was British. But still…I don’t think it’s much of a challenge making a living teaching philosophy.
I went on to make an honest living in the music business, and then in sales and then in food service, all of which were loads more fun than lecturing the undead about stuff they would never understand would have been.
That’s me.
Don’t you find an extreme irony in the idea of professional philosophy?
There are identifiable factors involved in becoming a professional anything, and in maintaining that position within contemporary constraints. As philosophers, it is what we do to think around these factors, to know and solve beyond constraints. To then package this process into a professional position is just absurd - like a kind of perverse masochism or something. And we all ought to know economic/physical conditions impact on one’s thinking. I think philosophy as a profession would be positively stifling, don’t you?
I think philo-sophy is by nature ama-teuristic. I suspect the professionalisation that is one of the key aspects of contemporary “philosophy” is a key reason for the apparent absence of any genuine philosophers, in the Nietzschean sense of the term, in that “philosophy”.
I’ve got a really good glove and powerful arm when it comes to adult league softball. With respect to MLB, no amount of training would give me the ability to play in the Majors.
Because, imm, the only way I could be a professional philosopher would be if I taught. I took a semester of Intro to Teaching and by the end of the course had decided I didn’t want to teach. Of course that was the main part of the final–What did you learn from the course, and why? I told him, the instructor, why–and got a C in the course. rofl
I am a professional philosopher. Problem is I don’t have any competition, and may never of had any in the first place. Nobody even comes close to me anymore. And it’s not because I smell bad either. My knowledge is so sharp, clenching broken glass feels like wet clay to me. Bragging is awesome.
Willpower of course. There is no such thing as a non passionate philosopher. True, real, authentic philosophers are very, very, very powerful men, thinkers who are filled with unbridled passion to injure or kill those who would do the same to him. It’s about pure violence, pure physics, pure knowledge. You have to want it, more than anything. You’ve got to be willing to die for it, without hesitation. Without a slight feint, fearless, powerful, wise.
It’s about wisdom that comes with age, intellect, and willpower. Those who are most strongly willed are ones who all others envy. A philosopher must be wise as he is powerful, smart as he is strong. Weaklings and cowards and trolls need not apply.
Things just aren’t right for me to go to grad school. I can’t really write well enough either or give lectures. I am on the quest for sophia though. I will find her and inject her with my seed.
I prefer more freedom over status. I see most professional philosophers, or whatever that is you call them - those who work in universities and write/publish their own gibberish - more as scholars than true philosophers. Because they are omg! - professional! and in public view, the boundaries of their philosophical pursuits are defined beforehand, and their work/quest is censored. By necessity and nature of their position they lead more or less caged philosophical existence.
It’s pretty much the same reason why one wouldn’t want any other of his hobby to end up his work, if one truly loves his hobby and wants to get maximum freedom and enjoyment out of it.
Haha wow, I never knew that. An amateur is by derivation a lover - only different from being a philosopher in the lack of concentration on wisdom.
I also looked up the derivation of “professional” and it’s just perfect:
It comes from professio, meaning taking of the vows of a religious order…
So the extreme irony I pointed out in the idea of professional philosophy is only further validated. To make a religion out of philosophy…
With regard to the above, I absolutely agree.
I agree that philosophy is necessarily passionate. Philosophy is music. But not all passion is philosophy.
Your boasts are… passionate, I suppose, but is your philosophy limited to celebrating how you are such a good philosopher? I don’t think I’ve seen any evidence of you philosophising about anything other than your self-proclaimed reputation and ability. This, on its own, has zero impact as I’m sure a true philosopher would understand… I’d like to see more.
How can anyone “come close to you anymore” if all you assert is your superiority - when nobody knows a thing about you, and therefore cannot connect with your philosophy?
A professor is merely one who professes (to know/believe).
A professional is one who relies on his profession, the tenants of his knowledge/beliefs.
A religious adherent is one who holds to beliefs without sustainable reasoning (faith).
Although a religious adherent is a professional, a professional, is not necessarily religious.
I looked at many courses but I would either not want to do them or I would want to do a small amount from a selection, either way I find it limiting. Not sure if I am a philosopher as such anyway, I don’t think there’s a word for what I am ~ thank the lord! [though I am sure some here can think of many words lol].
A lover of knowledge and wisdom could mean many things, but mostly it’s a pursuit for verifiable knowledge. This is part of what I am into but only so as to substantiate my greater love; the ‘poetic arts’ [though I am also not a poet lol]. Tbh I don’t have a term for it, in Druidry Bards are poets, Vate`s are herbalists, Druids are seers, Druid roughly means ‘oak-seer’ which is like a judge, one who can cut through all the crap, is stern and sturdy in their perception of the truth. …I am also not that, though there are elements of all the above.
A square peg in a round hole is the best description , I just don’t fit with the world or anything whatsoever.
A Druid sees the log, the hard logic, the “oak”. And thus can “judge” rationally (assuming he was good at it).
In a sense, he is a Logician, a Truth diviner/seer.
Indeed, a good judge can cut straight through all the stupid arguments made in court, only limited by the law itself. If you had great judges you probably wouldn’t need the law, but that we have also crap judges means we must have the law.
I think the ancients had something other than that in their arsenal, it is said [in our circles at least] that Blake was a druid, and he is more the type if there is one, that I am. I have no modern correlative to label myself as, its still ‘seeing’ in a similar manner, but utilised more in terms of abstract perception and ‘truth’ rather than fact based or law based perception.
, I just don’t fit with the world or anything whatsoever.