Philosophy Map
To map philosophy would necessitate a certain hierarchy within philosophy. Historically (as demonstrated in the Oxford Companion to Philosophy) this mapping centers more “objective” sub-disciplines such as Logic with Epistemology and Metaphysics. I do most certainly consent to this intimate and necessary relation between Epistemology and Metaphysics and acknowledge the consistency of precision the Logic so wields. I have no problem with the application of Logic insofar as it resists the urge so persistent in the sciences quest for objectivity whereby it detaches truth claims from value claims. The benefits from doing this is a purely abstract or theoretical sense are self-evident, yet when applied and even when constructed the values of logicians themselves are sure to leave their mark on the allegedly “value-free” proofs. This is not to say that one should not strive for an absolute truth, but simply that the means by which we pursue such a goal out to be hermeneutically pursued. The inter-relatedness between philosophical disciplines ought to be more fully illuminated. While philosophy prides itself on the competitive nature of contrasting arguments, whereby the dialectic synthesis two distinct ideas, thus allowing these ideas to transcend into a greater understanding, this process requires a certain reciprocity and openness to constructive criticism that I find alarmingly absent throughout academic philosophy (even in my own philosophy).
It is my heartfelt belief that philosophy ought not to aspire to “foundationalism” and abandon its quest for an ultimate truth from the confines of a singular position, thus within philosophy itself, there ought to be no center of which the remainder of sub-disciplines are subservient to. Instead while acknowledging the need for certain leadership, which I shall grant to Logic, Epistemology, Metaphysics and also Ethics(in order to infuse the cogitation of value within all philosophy), I advocate a truly democratic structure throughout the discipline. My personal philosophical orientation would focus on, but never be limited to, Ethics, Epistemology, Political Philosophy, Social Philosophy, Eastern Philosophy, Latin American Philosophy, Feminist Philosophy (the latter three I argue have been all unjustly marginalized within contemporary philosophy).
Sunday, February 18, 2007
Saturday, February 3, 2007
Library Project: Phase 2
http://plato.stanford.edu/contents.html
This is an unbelievable site for any philosophical inquiries/research, as I have used it on multiple occasions in the past. It was introduced to me by Professor McCarthy during our Watsuji class last spring.
http://www.erraticimpact.com/
From what I saw this looks like a really thorough site.
http://www.apa.udel.edu/apa/index.html
I’ve used this site before on many occasions when researching jobs and grad programs in philosophy.
http://newfirstsearch.oclc.org/WebZ/FSPrefs?entityjsdetect=:javascript=true:screensize=large:sessionid=fsapp2-56857-exjosbs2-ohern5:entitypagenum=1:0
This search engine for philosophical texts yielded some extremely thorough results when I ran a few searches. I was quite impressed.
http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/gpi/philo.htm
This site was also quite thorough, yet, as has become a general trend throughout this project, non Western sources were severely limited at best.
This is an unbelievable site for any philosophical inquiries/research, as I have used it on multiple occasions in the past. It was introduced to me by Professor McCarthy during our Watsuji class last spring.
http://www.erraticimpact.com/
From what I saw this looks like a really thorough site.
http://www.apa.udel.edu/apa/index.html
I’ve used this site before on many occasions when researching jobs and grad programs in philosophy.
http://newfirstsearch.oclc.org/WebZ/FSPrefs?entityjsdetect=:javascript=true:screensize=large:sessionid=fsapp2-56857-exjosbs2-ohern5:entitypagenum=1:0
This search engine for philosophical texts yielded some extremely thorough results when I ran a few searches. I was quite impressed.
http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/gpi/philo.htm
This site was also quite thorough, yet, as has become a general trend throughout this project, non Western sources were severely limited at best.
Library Project: Phase 1, Part B
Kersey, Ethel. 1989. Women Philosophies. Greenwood Press: New York, NY.
This reference was particularly interesting to me as I am taking Feminist Philosophies in addition to a Feminist Sociology course this semester.
Bales, Engen. 1987. A Ready Reference to Philosophy East and West. University of America Press: Lanham, MD.
This reference was, although not surprisingly, disappointing in that it has the audacity to call itself East and West yet of the 10 chapters in the book, only two were about Eastern Philosophy and these chapters were respectively confined to the philosophies of India and China.
Buswell, Robert. 2004. Encyclopedia of Buddhism. MacMillan Reference: New York, NY.
I’ve had a fascination with Buddhist Philosophy for quite some time and this looked like a really informative reference which I might use in the future.
McGreal, Ian. 1961. Worldly Philosophy. Salem Press: Englewood, NJ
Degeorge, Richard. 1980. The Philosophers Guide. The Regents Press of Kansas. Lawrence, KA.
These last two sources, while seemingly informative, still bothered me with what has become philosophies universal fallacy of claiming universality while simultaneously limiting its scope to almost exclusively Western philosophies.
This reference was particularly interesting to me as I am taking Feminist Philosophies in addition to a Feminist Sociology course this semester.
Bales, Engen. 1987. A Ready Reference to Philosophy East and West. University of America Press: Lanham, MD.
This reference was, although not surprisingly, disappointing in that it has the audacity to call itself East and West yet of the 10 chapters in the book, only two were about Eastern Philosophy and these chapters were respectively confined to the philosophies of India and China.
Buswell, Robert. 2004. Encyclopedia of Buddhism. MacMillan Reference: New York, NY.
I’ve had a fascination with Buddhist Philosophy for quite some time and this looked like a really informative reference which I might use in the future.
McGreal, Ian. 1961. Worldly Philosophy. Salem Press: Englewood, NJ
Degeorge, Richard. 1980. The Philosophers Guide. The Regents Press of Kansas. Lawrence, KA.
These last two sources, while seemingly informative, still bothered me with what has become philosophies universal fallacy of claiming universality while simultaneously limiting its scope to almost exclusively Western philosophies.
What is Philosophy?
To ask what philosophy is necessitates one to ask what is philosophy becoming. The nature of philosophy has greatly evolved over time, yet what persists throughout its evolution is an attempt to somehow transcend one’s subjective limitations and know the world as God knows it. Philosophy constitutes a synthesis between the particular and the universal, the subjective and the objective, opinion and Truth. My problem with much philosophy, particularly Platonic and Christian, is that it creates dichotomies between the good and the bad, heaven and hell, true and false, when in reality we live in a single world. The truth is more complex than black or white. This becomes the danger of abstract philosophizing, which seems to believe, for instance, the Plato’s Forms exist independent of the reality in which they are pursued. Thus, to Plato, in order to discover the truth one must be prepared to abandon one’s world and as an atomized individual transcend this world into some higher more universal realm.
This process of pursuing truth has two sides, albeit one is typically severely neglected. We look at the rise of modernity as if it was an autonomous creation of Europe’s superior intellect, yet it was only after 1492 that Europe became the center of the world system (Immanuel Wallerstein). This is an issue that I explored in some depth during my Latin Philosophy Class last semester. Through the readings of such philosophers as Walter Mignolo and Enrique Dussel, our class explored some of the overwhelmingly Eurocentric biases of such great German philosophers as Kant, Hegel and Habermas. Since Germany is the home to much of what we call philosophy it seems quite necessary to expose the context in which such philosophy was actually created. In short, without the radical transformation in material conditions afforded by the seemingly infinite abundance of resources and labor in the New World, the rise of modernity never would have taken place. This illuminates my problem with analytic philosophy. On one side, their focus on logic is necessary, however, it is in no way sufficient as it frequently neglects the time and space in and through which any philosophical work is created.
Another problem I have with the way much philosophy has been conducted is that it has relied on the assumption that the most objective philosophy is the product of atomized individuals. Given the problem of induction, the difficulties of transitioning from a subjective to an objective understanding of the world are quite considerable. How can one know the whole if one’s perspective is limited to but a particular part? Broadening one’s perspective by actively collaborating with other members of a community is necessary albeit still insufficient to gaining a completely objective understanding of the world. Nonetheless, this is a necessary step, in that in a sense, it allows one to transcend the confines of one’s own biases and insufficiencies of experience, in order to not only know the world more objectively, but perhaps even more importantly to live more ethically and thus peacefully within both one’s local community and the global community. Perhaps Kant was right and we can never know the noumena, yet life does not necessitate us to know so much as it necessitates us to live. By creating an absolutely inclusive dialogue between all members of one’s community and also between different communities, one is able to facilitate a democratic epistemology and ethics. This epistemology and ethics must be reciprocal and allow for constructive criticism that transcends the traditional hierarchy of knowledge production in which knowledge is seen as being passed down, vessel to vessel, from the teacher to the student. The teacher can also learn and the student can also teach for both have a subjectively limited worldview and thus both can mutually benefit from a truly open communal approach to both knowing and living ethically.
In my opinion, philosophy needs to abandon its pursuit of any fixed essences (such as Plato’s Forms or Hegel’s Spirit). Immanuel Kant introduced philosophy as a method of critiquing current epistemologies and metaphysics. This critical application of philosophy is absolutely necessary and illuminates the need for philosophy even in 2007. Philosophy can serve to check and balance the dogma of Christianity, Islam, Communism and Capitalism just as it can serve to preserve these dogmatic forces. The fact remains that philosophy does not evolve in some abstract vacuum but in a particular socio-historical context. Thus to understand any given philosopher’s ideas requires one to take stock of the history and culture that so envelopes any philosopher. Nonetheless, existentialist thought demonstrates that we are more than the products of our time and space and that in the end we have the great power and responsibility to choose where we stand and not just what we philosophize about but for whom we philosophize as well.
By far the most influential philosopher in my life is Watsuji Tetsuro. Despite Watsuji’s active and conscious participation in some of the horrid atrocities committed by Imperialist Japan during World War Two of which I wrote my term paper about last semester for my Sociology of Knowledge class, Watsuji’s synthesis of Eastern and Western ideas is utterly enlightening. Watsuji’s early philosophical education was confined to Western philosophy, which introduces an interesting topic explored both in my Watsuji class and in my Latin American Philosophy class, that is, is there even such a thing as Japanese or Latin American philosophy respectively. The very framing of this question demonstrates the Eurocentric sickness of what many of us seem to exclusively consider philosophy. The argument can be made that only European’s actively sought to answer universal questions, whereas Japanese thought was insufficiently critical (as if this wasn’t the case during the middle ages in Europe) and culturally isolated and Latin American thought too particular and political (as if such profoundly influential thinkers as Locke and Hobbes weren’t strongly influenced by the political context of their place and age).
Watsuji’s own socio-historical context of a Western education coupled with Buddhist teachings and a distinctly unique Japanese culture parallels the east-west synthesis in his own philosophy. In short, Watsuji believes that to be truly human necessitates us to be both an individual and a member of a community (environmental, political, cultural, and of course being part of one’s family. Herein, we see Watsuji’s refusal to succumb to the binary logic so rampant in Western thought (particularly in the sciences). One must incessantly negotiate and renegotiate seeing oneself both as an autonomous individual and as part of a greater whole. Watsuji’s ideas are expressed through concrete examples such as to be a teacher their must also be students just as to be a husband requires that their be a wife, without the one the other ceases to exist. Furthermore, it is not as though we evolve into communitarian beings (as asserted by Rousseau’s original state of nature), for we have always identified ourselves in relation to others. The most clear example of this is the existence of language. We think in language and language’s intention is necessarily to communicate. While we may communicate without language we cannot use language and continue to perceive ourselves as isolated, atomized individuals. Watsuji gives an example to explain this in which he notes that even a philosopher thinking alone in his room as he or she merely stairs at a blank wall is thinking through language and since this language could not have been formed or evolved on an exclusively individual level, one’s philosophy is always necessarily a community endeavor. The ethical ramifications of Watsuji’s philosophy are absolutely remarkable as they synthesize many Western ideas of liberalism such as human rights and a community responsibility historically embedded in Japanese and Eastern culture.
In conclusion, philosophy is seeking a mirage if it continues to seek essences. The truth lies in relations, in the betweeness between the myriad parts, and thus to know is a two fold process whereby we must study the whole and the part. This epistemological method is reveled through Japanese, Latin American and Feminist Philosophy, in addition to complexity studies in the sciences and cultural studies in the humanities. To know one we must know the other. Furthermore, we must recognize that reality is constantly moving. Therefore, to know the truth we must move with it.
This process of pursuing truth has two sides, albeit one is typically severely neglected. We look at the rise of modernity as if it was an autonomous creation of Europe’s superior intellect, yet it was only after 1492 that Europe became the center of the world system (Immanuel Wallerstein). This is an issue that I explored in some depth during my Latin Philosophy Class last semester. Through the readings of such philosophers as Walter Mignolo and Enrique Dussel, our class explored some of the overwhelmingly Eurocentric biases of such great German philosophers as Kant, Hegel and Habermas. Since Germany is the home to much of what we call philosophy it seems quite necessary to expose the context in which such philosophy was actually created. In short, without the radical transformation in material conditions afforded by the seemingly infinite abundance of resources and labor in the New World, the rise of modernity never would have taken place. This illuminates my problem with analytic philosophy. On one side, their focus on logic is necessary, however, it is in no way sufficient as it frequently neglects the time and space in and through which any philosophical work is created.
Another problem I have with the way much philosophy has been conducted is that it has relied on the assumption that the most objective philosophy is the product of atomized individuals. Given the problem of induction, the difficulties of transitioning from a subjective to an objective understanding of the world are quite considerable. How can one know the whole if one’s perspective is limited to but a particular part? Broadening one’s perspective by actively collaborating with other members of a community is necessary albeit still insufficient to gaining a completely objective understanding of the world. Nonetheless, this is a necessary step, in that in a sense, it allows one to transcend the confines of one’s own biases and insufficiencies of experience, in order to not only know the world more objectively, but perhaps even more importantly to live more ethically and thus peacefully within both one’s local community and the global community. Perhaps Kant was right and we can never know the noumena, yet life does not necessitate us to know so much as it necessitates us to live. By creating an absolutely inclusive dialogue between all members of one’s community and also between different communities, one is able to facilitate a democratic epistemology and ethics. This epistemology and ethics must be reciprocal and allow for constructive criticism that transcends the traditional hierarchy of knowledge production in which knowledge is seen as being passed down, vessel to vessel, from the teacher to the student. The teacher can also learn and the student can also teach for both have a subjectively limited worldview and thus both can mutually benefit from a truly open communal approach to both knowing and living ethically.
In my opinion, philosophy needs to abandon its pursuit of any fixed essences (such as Plato’s Forms or Hegel’s Spirit). Immanuel Kant introduced philosophy as a method of critiquing current epistemologies and metaphysics. This critical application of philosophy is absolutely necessary and illuminates the need for philosophy even in 2007. Philosophy can serve to check and balance the dogma of Christianity, Islam, Communism and Capitalism just as it can serve to preserve these dogmatic forces. The fact remains that philosophy does not evolve in some abstract vacuum but in a particular socio-historical context. Thus to understand any given philosopher’s ideas requires one to take stock of the history and culture that so envelopes any philosopher. Nonetheless, existentialist thought demonstrates that we are more than the products of our time and space and that in the end we have the great power and responsibility to choose where we stand and not just what we philosophize about but for whom we philosophize as well.
By far the most influential philosopher in my life is Watsuji Tetsuro. Despite Watsuji’s active and conscious participation in some of the horrid atrocities committed by Imperialist Japan during World War Two of which I wrote my term paper about last semester for my Sociology of Knowledge class, Watsuji’s synthesis of Eastern and Western ideas is utterly enlightening. Watsuji’s early philosophical education was confined to Western philosophy, which introduces an interesting topic explored both in my Watsuji class and in my Latin American Philosophy class, that is, is there even such a thing as Japanese or Latin American philosophy respectively. The very framing of this question demonstrates the Eurocentric sickness of what many of us seem to exclusively consider philosophy. The argument can be made that only European’s actively sought to answer universal questions, whereas Japanese thought was insufficiently critical (as if this wasn’t the case during the middle ages in Europe) and culturally isolated and Latin American thought too particular and political (as if such profoundly influential thinkers as Locke and Hobbes weren’t strongly influenced by the political context of their place and age).
Watsuji’s own socio-historical context of a Western education coupled with Buddhist teachings and a distinctly unique Japanese culture parallels the east-west synthesis in his own philosophy. In short, Watsuji believes that to be truly human necessitates us to be both an individual and a member of a community (environmental, political, cultural, and of course being part of one’s family. Herein, we see Watsuji’s refusal to succumb to the binary logic so rampant in Western thought (particularly in the sciences). One must incessantly negotiate and renegotiate seeing oneself both as an autonomous individual and as part of a greater whole. Watsuji’s ideas are expressed through concrete examples such as to be a teacher their must also be students just as to be a husband requires that their be a wife, without the one the other ceases to exist. Furthermore, it is not as though we evolve into communitarian beings (as asserted by Rousseau’s original state of nature), for we have always identified ourselves in relation to others. The most clear example of this is the existence of language. We think in language and language’s intention is necessarily to communicate. While we may communicate without language we cannot use language and continue to perceive ourselves as isolated, atomized individuals. Watsuji gives an example to explain this in which he notes that even a philosopher thinking alone in his room as he or she merely stairs at a blank wall is thinking through language and since this language could not have been formed or evolved on an exclusively individual level, one’s philosophy is always necessarily a community endeavor. The ethical ramifications of Watsuji’s philosophy are absolutely remarkable as they synthesize many Western ideas of liberalism such as human rights and a community responsibility historically embedded in Japanese and Eastern culture.
In conclusion, philosophy is seeking a mirage if it continues to seek essences. The truth lies in relations, in the betweeness between the myriad parts, and thus to know is a two fold process whereby we must study the whole and the part. This epistemological method is reveled through Japanese, Latin American and Feminist Philosophy, in addition to complexity studies in the sciences and cultural studies in the humanities. To know one we must know the other. Furthermore, we must recognize that reality is constantly moving. Therefore, to know the truth we must move with it.
My Philosophy courses
Humanities: This course was technically an english course that I took for my first semester during my senior year in high school and was my first introduction to a discussion based class, which I loved from the start.
PHIL 100A Intro to Philosophy: This course opened my eyes to the ideas of Plato, Hume, and philosophy in general. After finishing this course I knew that I wanted to major in philosophy.
Western Political Thought: I took this class over the summer in between my freshman and sophomore years at SLU at Tufts University. The course was technically listed as a political science course, yet the discussion based structure of the class was highly philosophical in addition to the reading list which included Adam Smith, Descartes, and one of my favorite philosophers at the time who was introduced to me in my intro class, John Stuart Mills. Due to a computer program the professor never actually received my final paper which was on one of my favorite works to this very day, Mills’ On Liberty. Despite not getting any credit for this course, the experience of taking a class outside of SLU was most appreciated, especially considering that about three quarters of the class was international students, which as one could imagine made for some fascinating discussions.
PHIL 203A Ethical Theory: This class had the best discussions of practically any philosophy classes I have taken to this day considering the diversity of the class (devout Christians, Hippies, Economics Majors, and even a pregnant student). This course opened my eyes to the relevance of philosophy today and the various ways in which it can be applied to real life situations.
PHIL 202A Reasoning: This was probably the most challenging philosophy course I have ever taken, given my lack of mathematical skill and enthusiasm. I really had to work in this course. I think this course should be a requirement for all college graduates for its skills can be applied in virtually any real life situation.
PHIL 204A Theories Knowledge & Reality: This course provided some tremendously valuable background and introductions to numerous philosophical approaches. I particularly enjoyed reading Kant’s Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics and some of the class discussions were highly inspiring. Like Reasoning I think this course should be experience by all SLU students.
PHIL 206B Political Theory: This course had an amazing reading list, and really provided the backbone for understanding virtually all modern politics. This course was my first genuine exposure to reading philosophical works whose views I strongly disagree with such as Hobbes and Machiavelli. This course provided me the tremendously valuable insight of learning to actually listen to the other side of things and enabled me to begin cutting through the dualistic structure of many of my ideas. This particularly opened my eyes to the value of studying not only the content of any philosophical work but moreover the context in which it was created. This course introduced me to the idea that to change the world one must first understand it from a multiplicity of perspectives, particularly those historically in positions of power.
PHIL 327A Existential Philosophy: This course was probably the most enjoyable philosophy course I have ever taken, perhaps because it was my first experience taking a course consisting of a majority of fellow philosophy majors. The ideas of existentialism were some of the most inspirational I have encountered to this day in that many of the core themes and concepts served as excellent and profound articulations for ideas I had already been struggling with since my high school years.
PHIL 347B SPTP:Envr East&West: This course had a community service component which opened my eyes to some of the challenges of small scale farming in our modern age. This course was but another example of the holistic potential of philosophy as it is truly interconnected to many academic disciplines including environmental studies.
PHIL 223A Asian Philosophy: This course definitely complimented my Watsuji course. The course focused on Taoism and Buddhism and proved highly inspirational both academically and spiritually.
PHIL 245A Ancient Greeks: This course reviewed a lot of highly influential philosophical ideas, particularly those of Plato, that are strongly connected to the historical development of essentially all Western philosophical thought.
PHIL 390A Philosopher:WATSUJI Tetsuro: This course was absolutely amazing, as we studied the main work of Watsuji, Ethics, this course was without a doubt the most influential of any philosophy course I have ever taken as it introduced me to many of the benefits of non-Western philosophical inquiry and profoundly altered my own philosophy on philosophy.
PHIL 247A SPTP:Philososphy from the Periphery:PowerBeingLatinAmerica: This course definitely complimented the Watsuji course in terms of looking at ideas within their spatial and temporal contexts. This course in addition to SOC 347A SPTP: Sociology of Knowledge, Watsuji, and some of the feminist critiques of scientific epistemology introduced in PHIL 204A Theories Knowledge & Reality profoundly revolutionized my own philosophy away from essences and towards relationality.
PHIL 100A Intro to Philosophy: This course opened my eyes to the ideas of Plato, Hume, and philosophy in general. After finishing this course I knew that I wanted to major in philosophy.
Western Political Thought: I took this class over the summer in between my freshman and sophomore years at SLU at Tufts University. The course was technically listed as a political science course, yet the discussion based structure of the class was highly philosophical in addition to the reading list which included Adam Smith, Descartes, and one of my favorite philosophers at the time who was introduced to me in my intro class, John Stuart Mills. Due to a computer program the professor never actually received my final paper which was on one of my favorite works to this very day, Mills’ On Liberty. Despite not getting any credit for this course, the experience of taking a class outside of SLU was most appreciated, especially considering that about three quarters of the class was international students, which as one could imagine made for some fascinating discussions.
PHIL 203A Ethical Theory: This class had the best discussions of practically any philosophy classes I have taken to this day considering the diversity of the class (devout Christians, Hippies, Economics Majors, and even a pregnant student). This course opened my eyes to the relevance of philosophy today and the various ways in which it can be applied to real life situations.
PHIL 202A Reasoning: This was probably the most challenging philosophy course I have ever taken, given my lack of mathematical skill and enthusiasm. I really had to work in this course. I think this course should be a requirement for all college graduates for its skills can be applied in virtually any real life situation.
PHIL 204A Theories Knowledge & Reality: This course provided some tremendously valuable background and introductions to numerous philosophical approaches. I particularly enjoyed reading Kant’s Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics and some of the class discussions were highly inspiring. Like Reasoning I think this course should be experience by all SLU students.
PHIL 206B Political Theory: This course had an amazing reading list, and really provided the backbone for understanding virtually all modern politics. This course was my first genuine exposure to reading philosophical works whose views I strongly disagree with such as Hobbes and Machiavelli. This course provided me the tremendously valuable insight of learning to actually listen to the other side of things and enabled me to begin cutting through the dualistic structure of many of my ideas. This particularly opened my eyes to the value of studying not only the content of any philosophical work but moreover the context in which it was created. This course introduced me to the idea that to change the world one must first understand it from a multiplicity of perspectives, particularly those historically in positions of power.
PHIL 327A Existential Philosophy: This course was probably the most enjoyable philosophy course I have ever taken, perhaps because it was my first experience taking a course consisting of a majority of fellow philosophy majors. The ideas of existentialism were some of the most inspirational I have encountered to this day in that many of the core themes and concepts served as excellent and profound articulations for ideas I had already been struggling with since my high school years.
PHIL 347B SPTP:Envr East&West: This course had a community service component which opened my eyes to some of the challenges of small scale farming in our modern age. This course was but another example of the holistic potential of philosophy as it is truly interconnected to many academic disciplines including environmental studies.
PHIL 223A Asian Philosophy: This course definitely complimented my Watsuji course. The course focused on Taoism and Buddhism and proved highly inspirational both academically and spiritually.
PHIL 245A Ancient Greeks: This course reviewed a lot of highly influential philosophical ideas, particularly those of Plato, that are strongly connected to the historical development of essentially all Western philosophical thought.
PHIL 390A Philosopher:WATSUJI Tetsuro: This course was absolutely amazing, as we studied the main work of Watsuji, Ethics, this course was without a doubt the most influential of any philosophy course I have ever taken as it introduced me to many of the benefits of non-Western philosophical inquiry and profoundly altered my own philosophy on philosophy.
PHIL 247A SPTP:Philososphy from the Periphery:PowerBeingLatinAmerica: This course definitely complimented the Watsuji course in terms of looking at ideas within their spatial and temporal contexts. This course in addition to SOC 347A SPTP: Sociology of Knowledge, Watsuji, and some of the feminist critiques of scientific epistemology introduced in PHIL 204A Theories Knowledge & Reality profoundly revolutionized my own philosophy away from essences and towards relationality.
Why Philosophy?
I decided to major in philosophy after my first semester at St. Lawrence. This decision was inspired by the Introduction to Philosophy course I took that first semester with Professor Rob Loftis. Rob's class was unlike anything I had ever experienced in that unlike most of my high school courses I actually looked forward to going to Rob's class. I think I knew I would pursue a future in philosophy one day in October as I was reading one of Plato's Dialogues and I realized how much I enjoyed the process of struggling through the multiplicity and complexity of thoughts that meandered throughout my mind. I think I first realized then that philosophy isn't so much about solving any problems, answering any questions or even proving any points, but more about appreciating the adventure of learning. I've been a dreamer for as long as I can remember, but it really wasn't until high school that I was able to apply any of my abstract ideas to my academics. My senior year in high school I took a class called humanities which, in hindsight, I discover was my first taste of philosophy. Ever sense then I've realized that no matter how abstract my thoughts may become as they meander almost aimlessly throughout my mind, I can apply them; to literature, to science, and most importantly to everyday discussions with anybody and everybody. Above all, I have come to study philosophy because it has the potential to radically transform and reorient my everyday experiences in the world, and once you get a taste of it, like in Plato's allegory of the cave when one exits the cave and sees real sunlight for the first time, there's no going back.
My decision to declare my major in philosophy was eased by the full support of my parents and the argument Rob loved to make about how philosophy could teach you to think like a math major and write like an English major. As I begin my final semester at SLU I doubt I have either the reasoning skills of a math major or the articulation of an English major, but I have learned a lot and I have garnered an insatiable hunger for knowledge. I love knowledge in and of itself, but during the last year or so I have begun to see the downsides of ideal philosophizing in terms of its egoism and potential inapplicability to the real world. I still want to go to graduate school for philosophy but next year at least I want to get some more practical experience in this world we all must live in. I believe this has a lot to do with some of the sociology courses I've taken. Sociology and European Studies are my two minors and have both complimented and contradicted my philosophical education. My Sociology courses have, like some Eastern philosophy, redirected my aims away from thoughts and towards action. My European Studies minor gave me the opportunity last semester to conduct an independent study concerning multiculturalism and immigration in Europe. This study served as a great example of the value of a liberal arts education where disciplinary boundaries begin to blur and sociology, cultural studies, statistics, politics and philosophy work in a holistic fashion to achieve a single goal, that being a better understanding of our reality, lending to a much more equipped arsenal to change the world.
More than anything else I consider my decision to major in philosophy as a great privilege. The only reason why I could even consider majoring in this subject if because of the ongoing support of my parents both financially and through their own curiosity concerning philosophy. I look at some of my friends from high school who didn’t have as much money and opportunities as I did growing up as many of them are critical of my decision to major in philosophy. One of my friends frequently points out the fact that because I had money growing up, money now has lesser value to me, and its true. I don’t feel as though I have to prove myself by making more money or even as much money as my parents, and at times I’ll admit I am unappreciative of all the opportunities that have been presented to me on a silver platter. Without a doubt, wealth means much more to someone if that someone actually earned it, whereas it was essentially just handed to me. In addition, I’ve come to realize that money really can’t buy happiness, and in fact, in many of my experiences it has led to a decrease in motivation and complicity concerning my role in the world. As I near graduation, I want to struggle. I want to experience what it means to be without and have to compensate accordingly, for without experiencing such struggle how can I ever hope to empathize with the vast majority of the rest of humanity.
My decision to declare my major in philosophy was eased by the full support of my parents and the argument Rob loved to make about how philosophy could teach you to think like a math major and write like an English major. As I begin my final semester at SLU I doubt I have either the reasoning skills of a math major or the articulation of an English major, but I have learned a lot and I have garnered an insatiable hunger for knowledge. I love knowledge in and of itself, but during the last year or so I have begun to see the downsides of ideal philosophizing in terms of its egoism and potential inapplicability to the real world. I still want to go to graduate school for philosophy but next year at least I want to get some more practical experience in this world we all must live in. I believe this has a lot to do with some of the sociology courses I've taken. Sociology and European Studies are my two minors and have both complimented and contradicted my philosophical education. My Sociology courses have, like some Eastern philosophy, redirected my aims away from thoughts and towards action. My European Studies minor gave me the opportunity last semester to conduct an independent study concerning multiculturalism and immigration in Europe. This study served as a great example of the value of a liberal arts education where disciplinary boundaries begin to blur and sociology, cultural studies, statistics, politics and philosophy work in a holistic fashion to achieve a single goal, that being a better understanding of our reality, lending to a much more equipped arsenal to change the world.
More than anything else I consider my decision to major in philosophy as a great privilege. The only reason why I could even consider majoring in this subject if because of the ongoing support of my parents both financially and through their own curiosity concerning philosophy. I look at some of my friends from high school who didn’t have as much money and opportunities as I did growing up as many of them are critical of my decision to major in philosophy. One of my friends frequently points out the fact that because I had money growing up, money now has lesser value to me, and its true. I don’t feel as though I have to prove myself by making more money or even as much money as my parents, and at times I’ll admit I am unappreciative of all the opportunities that have been presented to me on a silver platter. Without a doubt, wealth means much more to someone if that someone actually earned it, whereas it was essentially just handed to me. In addition, I’ve come to realize that money really can’t buy happiness, and in fact, in many of my experiences it has led to a decrease in motivation and complicity concerning my role in the world. As I near graduation, I want to struggle. I want to experience what it means to be without and have to compensate accordingly, for without experiencing such struggle how can I ever hope to empathize with the vast majority of the rest of humanity.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)