WHY STUDY PHILOSOPHYBy

Alloy S Ihuah PhDDept. of Rel. and Philosophy

Benue State University,Makurdi

“Why Study Philosophy?” or “Why are you Studying Philosophy?” are questions that

students of philosophy are almost always confronted and/ or affronted with. Quite often, the

inquirers themselves are not in a good position to explain to themselves and others why they

studied what they studied though, there is an element of self satisfaction in what can best be

described as the expression of subject jealousies (i.e. my course of study is better than yours).

One may attempt an answer to the posers though, the question is best answered if it is restated

as; what can Philosophy contribute to society? A similar question was posed in the Times

Magazine on January 7th, 1966 and entitled “What (if anything) to expect from today’s

Philosophers’. A similar title appears in one of the chapters of Kwasi Wiredu’s recent book

“Philosophy and an African Culture”. The chapter in question is “What can Philosophy do

for Africa? These titles are somewhat provocative because they mean to suggest that there is

some doubt as to what the Philosophers have to offer to the world today; there may even be

the suspicion that it has nothing to offer. Such questions are not asked of engineers, doctors

or bakers because it appears to be quite obvious that they have something to offer and what

they have to offer.

It argues here that, students who embark the study of Philosophy are asked why they study it.

Obviously students have their own personal reasons for such study of Philosophy. But if we

can say that Philosophy is difficult to read and hard to understand; if its subject matter is

obscure, its results unspectacular; if fewer and fewer people are interested in philosophy; if it

is true that a philosopher only knocks down what another built up over a life time, and that

they have only interpreted the world without changing it. If indeed, philosophy has no

pragmatic value either to get on in life or no lure in its own right, if Philosophy does not put

food on the table, create wealth and heaven for the individual here on earth and thus establish

for him/her a world worth living in and dying for, then why study it?

It may be well important to argue a case for the study of Philosophy by stating first and

foremost the obvious that, Philosophy is The Parent Discipline to which all other forms of

knowledge systems acknowledge. Great mi `nds like Socrates, Plato and Aristotle acted as

1

pathfinders of human intellectual architecture. The likes of Adam Smith, Jean-Jaques

Rousseau, Bertrand Russell, Francis Bacon, all master Philosophers, have variously made

stupendous contributions in economic, political, and social spheres and have similarly bathed

the world population with knowledge and wisdom. It is today dated that the philosopher is the

one who is ultimately responsible for the general outlook and the ideals of certain societies

and cultures. Karl Marx and Friederich Engels are on record as the ones who created the

point of view of the Communist party; Thomas Jefferson, John Locke and John Stuart Mills

have similarly developed the theories which prevailed in democratic societies.

As The parent Discipline, Philosophy feeds the other areas of human study with the breast of

critical examination and analysis of issues concerning our world and ourselves in order to be

more and more human. Such is why the zenith of human knowledge/learning is tagged

Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) in the various areas of study like Physics, History, English, Law,

or Medicine among others. This is the thinking that has informed the introduction of two

compulsory philosophy courses namely, GST 102: Introduction to philosophy and Logic,

and GST 104: History and philosophy of Science for Nigerian undergraduates in all Nigerian

Universities.

Reasons for studying philosophy run deep in the human spirit: As John Stuart Mill (d.

1873) put it:

“It is better to be a human being dissatisfied than a pig satisfied; better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a fool satisfied and if the fool or the pig, are of different opinion, I tis because they only know their own side of the question. And Adam Smith adds (d.1970).

‘A man without the proper use of the intellectual faculties of a man, is if possible, more contemptible than even a coward, and seems to be mutilated and deformed in a still more essential part of the character of human nature.

Philosophy delivers us from the bondage of conventional ways of thinking. As

Socrates said some four centuries before Christ ‘the unexamined life is not worth living’.

Either out of curiousity or the need to know we ask ourselves questions. And we ask

questions because we do not have the answers. We are uncertain. The value of philosophy is,

in fact, to be sought largely in its uncertainty. The man who has no spirit of philosophy in

him goes through life imprisoned in the prejudices derived from common sense, from the

habitual beliefs of his age and nation, and from convictions, which have grown up in his mind

without the cooperation or consent of his deliberate reason. To such a man the world tends to

become definite, finite, obvious, common objects rouse no questions, and unfamiliar

2

possibilities are contemptible. As soon as we begin to philosophize, on the contrary, we find,

as we saw in the course that even the most everyday things lead to problems to which only

incomplete answers can be given. Philosophy, though unable to tell us, with certainty what is

the true answer to the doubts, which it raises, is able to suggest many possibilities, which

enlarge our thoughts and free them from the tyranny of custom. Thus, while diminishing our

feelings of certainty, as to what things are, it greatly increases our knowledge as to what they

may b e; it removes the somewhat arrogant dogmatism of those who have never traveled into

the regions of liberating doubt, and it keeps alive our sense of wonder by showing familiar

things in an unfamiliar aspect.

But if we allow ourselves to be possessed by Philosophy then many things happen.

For the influences of philosophy are both direct and indirect. Socrates, the father of Moral

Philosophy, spoke about the direct influence of philosophy in the following way: ‘The course

of ignorance is that a man without being good or wise is nevertheless satisfied with himself:

he has no desire for that which he feels no want’.

Thinking Philosophically provides a basic ingredient, indeed an essential feature of

intellectual development. Without this vitamin one carries about the typical deficiency

diseases of the mind: misconception of points, vagueness of reason, wooliness of expression,

feebleness of intellectual grasp and emotions overworked as reasons are banished to the

wilderness.

The direct influences of philosophy are manifold: Philosophy is not concerned with

each idea, but how to think. It does not concentrate on making the weaker argument the

stronger” but tests each argument in the cold, clear light of reason. Its intention is not to

bamboozle the opposition into submission, but to present a point of view with clarity and

tolerance; it is not so much to refute your adversary but to join yourself with him in a higher

viewpoint. Real philosophy does not succumb to philosophical jargon in ignorance, but

consistently, coherently, it presents a vision and outlook, a viewpoint with real explanatory

power.

But philosophy also has its indirect influence and these are many. In fct Philosophers

are much more influential on people and on society than one might think: J.M. Keynes

observation is quite relevant here:

“The idea of economists and political philosophers both when they are right and when they are wrong, are more powerful than is commonly understood”. Indeed the world is ruled by little else. Practical men, who believe themselves to be quite exempt from any intellectual influences, are

3

usually the slaves of some defunct economists. I am sure that the power of vested interests is vastly exaggerated compared with the gradual encroachment of ideas.

Some of the influences of philosophers have become so much part of our culture that

we do not appreciate the pioneer work of the philosophers in their regard. I recall in particular

the morality of Socrates, the contemplation of Plato, the rationality of Aquinas and the

liberalism of Mill. Other influences have been more spectacular and dramatic like the

formation of the modern scientific mentality in the mind of the 18 th century Hume, the

contemporary atheistic culture in the mind of the 19th century Nietzsche, or the current

theories of structured inequality in the mind of Marx.

But it is often claim, is not of value because it is always dealing with the same issues.

The philosopher seems all the time to be concerned with questions like “what may I know?”

Who am I? ‘What ought I to do’? and ‘What do I hope for’? There are many observations one

could make here; I restrict myself to four of them.

(i) First of all, it is true that such questions keep reoccurring because the philosopher is

all the time pushing ahead, prodding for answers and criticizing those same answers.

This does not mean that the answers are not important. Of course they are. But the

philosopher in us leaves nothing to chance. And he is very convinced that if we could

get our questions straight then we could search in the right direction, make the

appropriate distinctions and discover the illuminating insights. Such a discovery of

insights will not consist in a neat answer, but an insight that while it discovers, leaves

more to be achieved.

(ii) If, as it appears, philosophers deal with the same questions from century to century we

must look back into the History of Philosophy and see how philosophers down the

ages have handled these same problems. You will discover as you read philosophy

that it has been one long conversation, a dialogue in which each party makes its

distinct contribution and in turn received from others. The man who tries to

philosophize without learning at the feet of the great philosophers is like a man going

down a dark alley blindfolded.

Philosophers have given us signposts along the way. We will not be blindfolded.

Some of these signposts say ‘go this way’ others say ‘do not enter’ and others still

‘cull de sac’. We must learn to read the sign ourselves and see for ourselves where to

go and what to do with the help of the signs. But in any case we cannot omit attending

4

to them because otherwise we will only land ourselves in fallacies an simplicities

which philosophers themselves have discovered centuries ago.

(i) Describing philosophers as always asking the same questions

does not fully describe the work of the philosopher. Plato 2000 years age studied the

problem of justice. You can say he is saying the same thing as yourself as you study

justice today. But you must also admit that many things have happened in the 2000,

whereby your questions and answers are much more developed and take into account

many more issues than Plato might have been concerned with.

(ii) As already stated it is very tempting and superficially smart to

say that philosophy is useless and ‘pie in the sky’. If you feel like rejecting philosophy

as muddleheaded nonsense then consider this remarks from Rahner.

“A man who refuses to commit himself for fear of following an insight that cannot be mathematically verified does not in fact remain free, but rather enters upon the worst of all commitments; that of living his life without commitment. He tries to live a life as a neutral, deciding nothing. And that itself is a decision.

Whatever, beliefs you have about life will be more nature and convincing if you are

able to reflect on them. Remember that the man or woman who will not reason is a bigot, and

the one who cannot is a fool, while the one who dare not is a slave. Some people think it is a

sign of common sense not to reason about basic issues in life or question things and other

consider it sophisticated to believe in nothing. When I find people anxious to tell me what

they do not believe in I like to suggest to them they tell me what they stand for. For it is also

true that the open mind that never makes up its mind is an empty mind. We cannot all the

time is standing scoffing on the sidewalks, of truth. While none of us has monopoly on truth

we must receive our share and cherish it. If everything becomes negotiable provided there is

agreement all it means is that we really accept nothing with any depth.

The achievements of philosophers are many:

i) There are words today we understand in a richer way precisely because of

the work of the philosophers. Today we have a keener sense of freedom, equality,

poverty, dignity development and we can largely thank the philosopher for it.

‘The philosopher in society witnesses to the supreme dignity of thought; he points to what is eternal in men, and stimulates out thirst for pure knowledge and disinterested knowledge, for knowledge of those

5

fundamentals about the nature of things and the nature of the mind and himself, and God – which are superior to end independent of, anything we can make or produce or create to which all our practice is appended, because we think before acting and nothing can limit the range of thought: our practical decisions depend on the stand we take on the ultimate questions that human thought is able to ask”.

ii) There are classics of philosophical analysis, which have stood the test of

time. Historical and familiar arguments like the ontological argument of Anselm,

which even Kant applauded, have rejected once and for all, so far as claim to validity

goes. Above all, it has been made clear what consequences a man commits himself to

in adapting certain positions, what further difficulties certain lines of reasoning entail.

iii) There has been built upon large common store of carefully formulated

philosophical concepts which have been subjected again and again to thorough going

analysis. Thus we have analyses of concepts like ‘truth’ ‘meaning’, ‘cause’, ‘ideas’,

‘happiness’, ‘value’ which are much more understandable experience of analysis.

It is thus not an overstatement to underscore the functional indispensability of

philosophy as a redeemer of humankind. Today, philosophers through the power of reason

have with their deeds stored up a treasury of values from which humanity can draw

inspiration to save the troubled world that has been so criminally poisoned by exaggerated

materialism. Philosophy is not just an effective source of knowledge, it is a useful way of life,

which opens up the eyes of the human soul to eternal truths.

As one builds upon one’s own philosophy of life in aid of one’s pilgrimage, it is a

wise choice to be guided by the following Ten Commandments of philosophy. One is

however advised to test them, refine them, and possibly reject some of them or add better

ones as one proceeds on his/her own pursuit of wisdom.

1. Allow the spirit of wonder to florish in your breast: Philosophy begins with deep wonder

about the universe and about who we are, where we came from and where we are going.

What is this life all about?

2. Doubt everything until the evidence convince you of its truth ;Bereasonably caotios , a

moderate sceptic, and suspicious of those who claim to hhave the truth. Doubt is the soul’s

laxative. Do not fear intellectual inwuiry as Johann Goethe (1749-says , “The masses fear the

intellectual, but it is stupidity that they should fear, if they only realized how dangerous it

really is”

6

3. Love the Truth: Philosophy is the external search for truth, a search for which

inevitability fails and yet is never defeated; which continually eludes us, but which always

guides us. This free intellectual life of the mind is the noblest inheritance of the western

world; it is also the hope of the future (W.T Jones)

4. Divide and Conquer: Divide each problem and theory into its smallest essential

components in order to analyze each unit carefully. This is the analytic method.

5. Collect and Construct: Build a coherent argument or theory from component parts. One

should move from the simple secure foundations to the complex and comprehensive. As

mentioned previously, Russell once said that the aim of philosophical argument was to move

from simple propositions so obvious that no one would think of doubting them via a method

of argument to conclusions that no one could help but doubt them. The important thing is to

have a coherent, well-founded, tightly reasoned set of beliefs that can withstand the

opposition.

6. Conjecture and Refute: Make complete survey of possible objection to your opposition,

looking for counter examples and subtle mistakes. Following a suggestion of philosopher

Karl Popper, philosophy is a system of conjecture and refutation. Seek bold hypotheses and

seek to find disconfirmations of your favorite positions. In this way, by a process of

elimination, you will negatively and indirectly and gradually approach the truth.

7. Revise and Rebuild: Be willing to revise, reject, and modify your beliefs and the degree

with which you hold any belief. Acknowledge that you have many false beliefs and be

gratefull to those who correct you.

8. Seek Simplicity: Prefer the simplest ezplanation to the more complex of all things being

equal. This is the principle of parsimony, sometimes known a Occam’s Razor.

9. Live the Truth: Appropriate your ideas in a personal way,so that even as the objective

truth is a correspondence of the thought to the world, this lived truth will be a correspondence

to the life to the thought. As Kierkegaard said, Here is a definition of (subjective) truth:

holding fast to an objective uncertainty in an appropriation process of the most passionate

inwardness is the truth, the highest truth available for an existing individual.

10. Live the Good: Let the practical conclusions of a philosophical reflection on the moral

life inspire and motivate you to action. Let moral truth transform your life so that you shine

like a jewel growing in its own light amidst the darkness of ignorance

7