What is the purpose of philosophy?
Is it a mere hobby or a way of life?
To plant subliminal messages in the minds of world leaders.
It’s to distract you while you’re bent over.
Ha!
Nice Christian response; prim and proper.
You didn’t really think that ALL Christians were sheep, did’ya.
I’m from Texas where men are men and the sheep … well … on all fours.
To inspire social change.
What sort of social change would you like to see mainly?
I don’t know if the alternatives depict solely ONLY philosophy. Is it a way of life? You could say the same if the question was: “What is the purpose of religion?”. Does that mean that philosophy is a form of religion? Maybe. The distinction was not automatic until “recently” in human history.
Upgrading of the human species.
Philosophia perennis.
To systematically befuddle oneself… and others, if you’re good.
The history of philosophy is an interesting one, and it didn’t start with the greeks by any means… as if Socrates was the first person to ever ask ‘why’.
It started with the acquisition of language, because it is with and through language that human beings began playing language games… or creating linguistic problems that they thought were conceptual problems. Now I’m not saying there are not legitimate philosophical questions. I’m just saying these aren’t philosophical problems. People ask ‘where did everything come from’. That’s a legitimate question, but not a philosophical problem. It’s a scientific problem, because it requires inductive investigation to be answered (if it can be answered). You can’t play philosophical tricks with this one.
The better question is not what is the purpose of philosophy, but where is the line between the natural sciences and philosophy. If you draw a line, you no longer have a specialized kind of thinking… you simply have ordinary language, of which what was previously called ‘philosophical’ would now belong.
The only reason philosophy even exists is because a) this line can’t easily be drawn, and b) the significant differences in the educational levels of human beings. This is where my ruling class thought rant begins.
Back in the days you couldn’t be a philosopher unless you had some kind of notoriety. You either had to be the bedfellow of some scientist, astronomer or mathematician, or you had to have some pull with the king, or you had to attract some controversy to yourself. The first two kinds are really irrelevant; they didn’t do anything that couldn’t be done without them. They were just hangers-on. The third is where the fun is at. Socrates and the Sophists, for instance. These dudes were the masters of the language game, and the academic philosophers hated them because their language games were challenged by these dudes.
People love nothing more than proving a philosopher wrong, especially the common folks who had no education. To become a gadfly, then, is to systematically befuddle the systematic befuddlers, you could say. Not to say these dudes were being dishonest; they had their fair share of confusion too just like the official, academic philosophers with all the degrees.
Now I don’t think Nietzsche’s criticism of Socrates was just. Socrates was doing the very same thing his philosophical adversaries were doing; befuddling.
Nietzsche’s beef was with the fact that prior to Socrates’ appearance, Greece was a more aristocratic society. Rulers didn’t think about whether what they did was right or wrong. They just did it. Nietzsche likes this method because it jibes well with his whole force of will and what not.
For once, I wish not to know many things, he once said, and this is a sneak peek into one of the first instances of the anti-philosopher. Fritz knew that the danger of becoming systematically befuddled was lurking in the distance of philosophy, so he wanted to get back to the old might is right style. Fuck it… don’t think about it, just do it, right? Why truth? Why not error? Error is not an argument against truth, but rather a condition of it. Genius. He just smashed epistemology in the face with a left hook, and it hasn’t recovered since. Just ask the post-structuralists.
Meanwhile, the scientists are engaged with solving real problems, answering real questions, etc. Ask a scientist what he thinks about a philosopher and he’ll tell you; a philosopher is a failed scientist.
But it’s too late. The size of our brains and our vocabularies are so ridiculously large that we can’t stop doing philosophy… or rather, we can’t stop staging questions and assertions that are not eligible to be answered or proved by the scientific method.
Can I be conscious after death. That’s the one EVERYBODY wants to know. Problem is, it can’t be answered, and that’s not fair to us. It’s stuff like this that turns you into a philosopher freak. You start preparing for both answers… you start living like a schizophrenic. You want to live as if you’re dead and that’s it, but you also want to live as if that’s not it. You gotta have a plan that would work in either case, but a nihilist and a spiritualist are incompatible; hence, your philosophical schizophrenia.
So now you start imagining what would be the case if that wasn’t it; where would I go, what would I do, and does anything I do now effect what I will do later, etc., etc.
Enter your conscience. Your conscience is the linguistic history of all the plans of all the people on how to live in a way that would make you a winner in either case. It is the part of the mind that recognizes us as both enemies and intimate companions. Me against you, us against them, but we all have that one thing in common; none of us asked to be born… we were not consulted first, we were thrown into existence. This drives us even more crazy because you can’t be angry at a guy who didn’t ask to be born. This is where morality begins. It is how we cover our own asses with a little effort to spare for the next guy… it is how we negotiate the decisions we have to make while we live, so that we don’t do something that would get us fucked up in the next life, but also so we don’t jeopardize any of the pleasures and freedoms we should have while living, if death is really the end. You see what I mean? We are all nihilists and spiritualists… which makes us philosophical schizophrenics.
I keep telling you people what we need is a common enemy. We need an alien threat to planet earth. The last thing on our minds would be what is moral or what is the sound of one hand clapping or is that the same river. We would be completely occupied with how to kick alien ass.
At any rate it is a great relief that I am no longer a philosopher. My life is simple and I don’t have to ask complicated questions. I agree with the Confucius now. Right shoe goes on the right foot, left shoe on the left foot. Practical solutions for everyday living.
Unless I am thrown into extraordinary circumstances, in which case I will become a philosopher once again because I’ll be faced with complicated questions, with no scientists around to help me answer them.
Science is a sub-set of philosophy.
Kind of cliché by now, but true.
Also, it’s not merely about empiricism, but also existentialism; giving one’s life style.
What he said. Only the way I would say it myself.
Not to worry. I’ll spare you this time. 
To question, analyze, and examine things for starters.
Thank goodness. I’ve been philosophy free for weeks. Don’t make me relapse man, ‘cause if I do, I’m takin’ you down with me.
And, after all, this is the philosophy forum.
To increase utility. Duh.
Spoken like our ILP resident day trader and hemp pharmaceutical distributor.
But you can’t say I’m wrong.
From your position or perception probably not.