Philosophy

Hi my name is Victoria! I was searching for some information about "what is the proper object of philosophy?" and couldn't find anything. Hope that I can get help on answering this question on the website. Thank you

Comments

"Philosophy" is derived from the Greek for "love" and "wisdom" and it is often rendered as "the love of wisdom." So one reply to your question is that the proper object of philosophical inquiry is whatever is a fitting object of study in the practice of loving wisdom. So, historically, those recognized as "philosophers" have investigated the nature of reality (Ancient Greek philosophy included theories that anticipated the atomic theory of matter and evolution...), human nature, values (including ethics, accounts of beauty and ugliness good and evil), our capacities to know ourselves and the world, reflection on logic, perception, memory, the sacred (is there a God or divine or sacred reality such as the Tao), questions of social values, matters of governance (political philosophy), and so on. Arguably, the quest to live wisely (or in light of loving wisdom) involves seeking insights into a very broad array of topics that are difficult to limit.

Sometimes historical events can shape the way philosophers work and what they work on (and see as the "proper object" of philosophy). So, in the 1950s and early 60s, philosophers in the English-speaking world largely neglected applied, practical ethical matters (the exception being those philosophers who were engaged in the Civil Rights movement in the USA), but in the midst of the Viet Nam War in the late 60s, and beginning in the early 1970s, philosophers gave far more attention to applied ethics (just war theory at first, but then ethics in medicine and a growing number of other domains).

During some periods in the history of ideas, groups or movements of philosophy develop that seek to pronounce and enforce an idea of what kind of philosophy is "proper" or improper. At one time or another, some philosophers have sought to determine (and sometimes even prove) that at least one of the following mix of philosophical convictions or methods or domains are improper:

Radical Skepticism

Metaphysics

Philosophy of Religion

"Continental philosophy"

"Analytic philosophy"

Phenomenology

The History of Philosophy

and more....

I believe that none of the above have been "proven" to be improper or sterile or out-of-bounds, and I suggest that when philosophers claim things like "X is dead" when X may stand for Metaphysics or Foundationalism or Skepticism (etc, etc) it seems less than obvious that the "philosopher" is a lover of wisdom.

Read another response by Charles Taliaferro

Read another response about Philosophy