My synthesis paper for my Philosophy course

[Im just gonna put this here] [Might be of help to others, just send me a message (here dabluerey@gmail.com) if you're planning on using any part of this]

Philosophy: A Healthy Psychosis

                        Love for Wisdom. This is a simple phrase which holds so much meaning. Wisdom is subjective and cannot be measured. For our Philosophers, wisdom varies in form but the idea that wisdom no doubt, exists; and that idea links them across time and places, unites their different views and ideologies. They see wisdom as a skill and throughout ages, and places, they continuously seek to nourish theirs and those around them.

The phenomenon of philosophical thinking starts always with a prior mental event, that is, the spirit of questioning.  I am now inclined to believe that in Philosophy, the questions asked by the philosophers are far more important than the answers they gave. With the simple question of Thales that made the the first attempt to search for the Urstuff, the quest began. From his hydor, to Anaximenes’ pneuma, to Anaximander’s apeiron, until Empedocles’ fourfold roots, as far as Democritus’ atomoi; all these conflicting conclusive findings started with just one innocent question. The search until now is not yet over. For it is the question that triggers the mind to think. The search for truth, great discoveries and formulation of ideas will not take place if there are no questions asked.

In Metaphysics, we see the Aristotlean Realism as a reaction against the Platonic Idealism. In Epistemology, we see the Cartesian Rationalism being superseded by John Locke’s Empiricism. What I am trying to reaffirm is, this swaying of the pendulum from one end to the other opposite at each century in the history of human thinking had all been ignited uniformly by just one single event: the phenomenon of questioning. This event is inherent, and a necessity in the reality of thinking itself. History certifies it. The Socratic Dialectics begins with it, Hegel’s synthesis cannot be attained without a previously well-thought question serving as anti-thesis overthrowing the thesis, Marxist proletariat cannot revolt without questioning the bourgeois’ abusive exploitation. Inherent to those shifts and inherent to those transformations of emphasis is always the posing of the questions. This explains why there is continuity and discontinuity, disagreement and agreement, rejection and integration in the history of Philosophy, which is demanded by this paper. It is in the ‘implanting’ of the question wherein the growth and development of Philosophy lies. Any student (just like me) must remember that a philosophical subject is not a religion/theology class, hence there should be no philosophical idea that must be considered as sacred/inviolable, nor any philosophers are to be bestowed with a Papal Infallibility. In Philosophy, nobody speaks in ex cathedra. Any philosophical position worth holding, and worth dying for, is a fair subject for critical scrutiny. If, in Philosophy, truth is what we seek, then we need to know where the weak spots in our position are, in order to improve them continuously and consistently. But in doing so, we need to set these positions aside as unsalvageable.

Avoiding criticisms doesn’t do anything to further strengthen a philosophical position. Covering one’s position prevents intelligent diagnosis, hence depriving a cure for a curable condition. In Philosophy, even the most cherished beliefs are not immune from the rigor of critical, but honest intellectual analysis. The ancient Greek philosopher-mathematician Pythagoras was the first one who coined the term Philo-Sofia (a lover of Wisdom). Wisdom (Sofia) means here, a virtue. Perhaps, even Pythagoras himself was totally unaware of the significance of what he said here. Virtue connotes action. Hence, we find in Wisdom, the union of both, theory and practice.

 In Wisdom, the knowing always culminates in the doing. Unlike knowledge (episteme), Wisdom does not end up merely in feeding and satisfying the mind. But this doesn’t imply belittling of knowledge.  Knowledge is a preparation and a pre-requisite to Wisdom. One cannot be wise unless he/she is knowledgeable. Still, even if one had all the knowledge of everything in this world. One cannot be necessarily considered as wise unless what he/she knew was translated into action.  Knowledge is just informative, while Wisdom is transformative. Sofia changes the knower; it transforms the one who knows his worldview, the way he looks at the others, the way he sees himself. No wonder why Pythagoras did not simply say Philo-episteme but Philo-Sofia when asked by a tyrant king of Syracuse if he is a sofoi.