Is studying philosophy beneficial?

above_us_only_sky · June 14, 2015, 6:58am

When a person (especially a person of younger age) read a piece of philosophy by a great philosopher, be it Socrates or Sartre, very often he cannot make a proper judgment by himself, because although he has good command of logic, he lacks experience about the world which is fundamental in making his own evaluation. And the inequality of intellectual maturity between him and the philosopher makes things worse. The philosopher he read maybe received a much better education than him, that philosopher may speak more than two foreign languages and have a life time of experience, therefore very often all he can do is to accept the paradigm of that philosopher.

For example, when I read important philosophers like Schopenhauer, a person who lived two hundred years ago yet writes with so much greater clarity, lucidness and genius than those self-claimed philosophers of our time, I cannot resist but to go along with his train of thoughts.

Schopenhaur once said: “… you may look upon life as an unprofitable episodes, disturbing the blessed calm of non-existence. And, in any case, even though things have gone with you tolerably well, the longer you live the more clearly you will feel that, on the whole, life is a disappointment, nay, a cheat.”

And when I read the quote by him above, I cannot make my own evaluation, If I want to evaluate it, I have to ask a 80 years old person " Do you think life is a cheat or not?"

I suspect a young person can never make an objective evaluation after reading philosophy like this, because if that young man/woman believe Schopenhaur is right after reading it, then that young person will see his/her later life as an evidence, or a footnote to Schopenhaur philosophy, that life is a cheat.

Schopenhaur once talked about the danger of reading/studying.

When we read, another person thinks for us, we merely repeat his mental process… And in reading, the mind is, in fact, only the playground of another’s thoughts. So it comes about that if anyone spends almost the whole day in reading, and by way of relaxation devotes the intervals to some thoughtless pastime, he gradually loses the capacity for thinking; This is the case of many learned person: they have read themselves stupid…

…The man who thinks for himself, forms his own thoughts and learns the authorities for them only later on, when they serve but to strengthen his belief in them and in himself. but the book-philosopher starts from the authorities. He reads other people’s books, collects their opinions and so forms a whole for himself, which resembles an automaton made up of anything but flesh and blood. --------------------Arthur Schopenhauer

A professor once told me :" Although I’m a philosophy professor, I have to be honest with you, Studying philosophy when one is young is really not a good thing, because when an inexperienced young man study philosophy, all he can get is a mind full of empty concepts spinning around. He has no foundation— the experience of life, to base his thinking, therefore don’t study philosophy until you turn 30." Maybe he is right, all that young man can be is a book-philosopher.

After all, Is reading/studying philosophy beneficial for a young person?

James_S_Saint · June 15, 2015, 10:50pm

Good OP.

I think there is room for proper introduction into philosophy to ensure that, usually hubris presumptions are not assumed by the young. Without the right introduction, a young man either chooses to worship what is given as what he is supposed to accept or he attempts to compare it to what he already likes or believes and rejects it accordingly. Once he has taken a stance, it takes a very, very long time (if ever) for him to accept that he was wrong, especially since he spends the rest of his life distorting everything he hears or reads based on his chosen bias.

I believe any intro to philosophy should begin with an understanding of ontology construction. From there, it doesn’t take nearly the life experiences to be able to at least verify whether a philosophy is rationally sound without having to guess. Of course, once that is well understood, almost all of the historical philosophers (and most scientists) suddenly seem like children … but that’s a another story … perhaps.

Twilight_of_the_Idol · June 15, 2015, 11:36pm

Kids should certainly be taught epistemology and logic.

Faust · June 16, 2015, 1:38am

Yes, it’s good for a young person. The most important prerequisite to the study of philosophy is a keen understanding of at least one language. Most people never achieve that. Probably most philosophers never achieve that. Age is not the problem.

barbarianhorde · June 17, 2015, 8:07pm

above us only sky:

When a person (especially a person of younger age) read a piece of philosophy by a great philosopher, be it Socrates or Sartre, very often he cannot make a proper judgment by himself, because although he has good command of logic, he lacks experience about the world which is fundamental in making his own evaluation. And the inequality of intellectual maturity between him and the philosopher makes things worse. The philosopher he read maybe received a much better education than him, that philosopher may speak more than two foreign languages and have a life time of experience, therefore very often all he can do is to accept the paradigm of that philosopher.

For example, when I read important philosophers like Schopenhauer, a person who lived two hundred years ago yet writes with so much greater clarity, lucidness and genius than those self-claimed philosophers of our time, I cannot resist but to go along with his train of thoughts.

Schopenhaur once said: “… you may look upon life as an unprofitable episodes, disturbing the blessed calm of non-existence. And, in any case, even though things have gone with you tolerably well, the longer you live the more clearly you will feel that, on the whole, life is a disappointment, nay, a cheat.”

And when I read the quote by him above, I cannot make my own evaluation, If I want to evaluate it, I have to ask a 80 years old person " Do you think life is a cheat or not?"

I suspect a young person can never make an objective evaluation after reading philosophy like this, because if that young man/woman believe Schopenhaur is right after reading it, then that young person will see his/her later life as an evidence, or a footnote to Schopenhaur philosophy, that life is a cheat.

Schopenhaur once talked about the danger of reading/studying.

When we read, another person thinks for us, we merely repeat his mental process… And in reading, the mind is, in fact, only the playground of another’s thoughts. So it comes about that if anyone spends almost the whole day in reading, and by way of relaxation devotes the intervals to some thoughtless pastime, he gradually loses the capacity for thinking; This is the case of many learned person: they have read themselves stupid…

…The man who thinks for himself, forms his own thoughts and learns the authorities for them only later on, when they serve but to strengthen his belief in them and in himself. but the book-philosopher starts from the authorities. He reads other people’s books, collects their opinions and so forms a whole for himself, which resembles an automaton made up of anything but flesh and blood. --------------------Arthur Schopenhauer

A professor once told me :" Although I’m a philosophy professor, I have to be honest with you, Studying philosophy when one is young is really not a good thing, because when an inexperienced young man study philosophy, all he can get is a mind full of empty concepts spinning around. He has no foundation— the experience of life, to base his thinking, therefore don’t study philosophy until you turn 30." Maybe he is right, all that young man can be is a book-philosopher.

After all, Is reading/studying philosophy beneficial for a young person?

Only if ur good at it cause otherwise it’s a waste of time. I went to drama school but I wasn’t good at it because I can’t fake emotions. In philosophy you have to do certain stuff, and if you’re good at that, life’s experience will tell you to continue it. It all depends on how much it gets you off.

zinnat · June 18, 2015, 5:16am

Sky,

James is absolutely right in his analysis.

There certainly are dangers of infusing suble and complicated notions to immature minds. Odds are in the favor that it may cause harm instead of benefiting.

And, you can see that happening on Internet philosophy forms. Many, or rather most of the young participants tend to believe that have been become omniscient after reading some philosophy.

This has been happened in the past too. Judaism is a perfect example of that. Moses was the most knowledgeable prophet amongst all Abrahamic religions. He offered a lot to the masses, even beyond that what they were able to handle.

They misinterpreted and twisted many of his sayings to suit their vested interests, and, as the result, Jew society became most intruded, instead of most wise one.

You cannot give a doctor’s knife to a monkry. It needs the knowledge and wisdom of a doctor to put it in good use. A monkey will either injure himself or others from it.

With love,
Sanjay

Arminius · June 18, 2015, 8:04pm

Yes, although a little bit exaggerated, but no problem. Experience is very important but not the only component when it comes to philosophy. If a young human is capable of loving wisdom, of logical thinking as well as strong and deep thinking, thus of studying philosophy, and of knowing that a young human has not much life experience, empirical knowledge, and to respect the philosophers with much life experience, empirical knowledge, then there is no problem for this young human to successfully study philosophy.