“It’s a philosopher’s job to tell people how they should lead their lives.â€
“But I’m a philosopher, and it’s a philosopher’s job to tell people how they should lead their lives.†Thus wrote Linda Hirshman in a recent article in the Washington Post. Linda R. Hirshman, is a retired professor of philosophy and women’s studies at Brandeis University.
If I had read in the morning paper some doctor saying “it is the doctor’s job to tell people how they should lead their lives.†I would not have blinked. I have no problem with a doctor making such a statement but a philosopher making such a statement certainly will cause a pause.
A retired professor of philosophy from Brandeis University cares weight with me and when such a person says something startling I must give it some heed; I must pause to reflect and study the meaning of that statement.
Reflection on this statement reveals to me that human life is really a philosophical endeavor. We do not realize it but every thought we have, every decision we make, and every action we take are based upon some philosophical assumptions. Philosophers have molded these assumptions into theories that now form the very essence of our life.
We ‘know’ what is real, what is knowledge, what is moral action, how the mind works, etc. because these philosophical theories permeate every aspect of our life. Metaphysics is a philosophy word that really means ‘what is real, what is time, what is essence, what is causation, etc’.
I guess I will give the professor an “A†here. It is a philosopher’s job to tell people how they should lead their lives.
I absolutely agree with this point of view; its a fact that when religion tells people what to do horrible things happen; and politicians aren’t always the smartest of people.
It should indeed be the philosophers job to construct a “common sense” type of system by which constitutional laws should be made and also by which common people could go about their lives.
Oh wait the stuff with the constitutional law IS a product of political philosophy… RELIGION HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH IT… yet again
You are clearly an idiot if you believe this. I’ve already shown you some of the contributions religion has made in the world and you accepted them. Now you come out with this ‘religion always produces bad results’ crap just because your aunt once made you drink wine and metaphorically referred to it as blood. Given that there are religions that you are clearly not even aware of you are not in a position to have any authority on this.
Also, Hitler, Stalin and the people responsible for Chernobyl weren’t religious, and look at what happened there. This isn’t a fact. It’s dogma that you are regurgitating. How ironic that you accept atheist dogma so uncritically…
Nor are scientists. Nor are religious people. Nor are philosophers.
So, according to you, it is the responsibility of the intellectually elite to tell people how to live, and this is ‘common sense’? Sounds like an atheist dictatorship to me…
The stuff with the constitutional law? What? Are you even trying to make sense?
What about a religious philosopher, or a religious scientist? According to you they would be both rational and irrational, both stupid and intelligent, both seeing and blind, both worthy of leading society and not worthy of leading society. You can’t have it both ways without being a hypocrite. If you are happy being a hypocrite then signal such and I’ll happily drop the issue.
its a philosophers job(occupation) to devise lesson plans/lectures and set the stage for intelligent debate.
I always thought it was my job to decide how i live my life(nobody other than my parents told me what to do, although some have suggested courses of action from friends and family)
in the end any suggestion i hear has to be decided upon by myself and only myself.
It is a philosophers job , I would argue, to make sense of the world; to navigate its complexities; to understand, explain human nature. This is a very different undertaking than telling one how they should lead their life. If there are no certainties and no absolutes, only tendencies (as I believe), then there is no wisdom is telling one how to lead their lives.
It is puerile (albeit intuitive) to believe that the person of highest intelligence, or of utmost wisdom, should tell us how to lead our lives. For we should recognize that intelligence must be counterbalanced with common sense/practicality to yield true wisdom. Thus the practitioner of ideas who believes intelligence implies accuracy or superiority is mistaken.
The wise realize that there is much wisdom in moderation.
I don’t see how there is any other point to a Philosopher than advising people on how to think, which can often mean having to advise them on how to behave. Very uncontroversial but I would assume as an academic (or retired academic) she is referring to professional Philosophers of the western tradition.
LOL You all make philosophy sound like a religion or a political party.
Philosophy is personal, it surely does not make you more intelligent.
Philosphy is about personal enlightenment To preach your philosphy and claim it to be the right one for everyone, is pretty much like any old preacher or politician. Here we don’t preach at each other we share or we are supposed to share not preach. LOL
Philosophy is sharing, giving of the most personal elements of yourself in hopes that you may help someone. No one philosphy is right. For if one philosphy is better then another or correct then we have stagnation and zero growth, and extinction. Even the wrong and dangerous philosphies contribute. It is not the philospher’s job to teach, it is the philospher’s job to learn.
It’s a philosopher’s job to re-situate problems within the current global coordinates of the world. He is not supposed to “solve” problems, nor is he supposed to point people towards fulfillment (which, as Lacan showed with tremendous ease, is relatively unfulfilling anyway) – rather, he is merely a tool for telling us: this problem has not yet been thought correctly.
Philosophy is worthless when it comes to real problems. Several asteroids headed towards earth? What are you going to do with philosophy? You can’t perform some kind of postmodern analysis and rule them out of existence – no, you need science, technology, etc. This only means that philosophy has already situated the problem of asteroids correctly.
I agree with you Obw, on the point of instructing thinking. But one also has to lend credence to what Impenitent stated.
Advising on structures of critical thinking, this is the philosopher’s job. “Tell people how to live” is not anyone’s business, other than the individual themself.
Laws are for the unjust and the cretin, and avail society of little, with the noted exception being employment for the perfidious and abject.
In the reality of it Carpathian, what either of us “says”, is of little importance. We aren’t likely to understand one another, in the most minute fashion.
Laws, stigmas, morays, prohibitions will exist whether either of us make a choice for or against them. Standard of human behavior, to seek to control others, as we don’t take the time to control ourselves.
Are they effective? No. Never have been, never will be. You set the wall before me, and post “Thou shalt not pass”, my intrinsic inclination will be to find a manner to succeed your impediment. Such the same are laws and prohibitions.
the stuff with the constitutional law IS a product of political philosophy… RELIGION HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH IT… yet again 
So tell me, where do I get a pair of those colored glasses you’re wearing? 
