TED Conversations

This conversation is closed.

Is Philosophy dead?

Was it buried beneath pragmatic scientific discourse? Stabbed through the heart by the stake of probability. Is there any room for conjecture in the button down business of modern scientific thought? In the world of proof, what is the point of pondering?

I sometimes chuckle and think philosophers and theologians are off in a corner somewhere playing chess, while the scientific community is haphazardly reinventing our reality.

Is there truth in the evident, or are we chasing our own tail?


Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • thumb
    Oct 2 2013: Colleen Steen, I learnt Eastern and Western philosophy and also several neuroscience etc researchs. All things based on words instead of core experience represents in a particular part of human brain which could be far from life experience. I read in paleopsychology and phisiology that second signal system suppresses the first signal system. It means word-based part of human brain may work rather aside from reality generating self-sufficient constructions.

    Eastern philosophy made ensurance from it by 2 ways: meditations and statement that everything codes by words is just a finger points to Moon but not Moon itself. Western philosohly as I know it has not such ensurence.

    That`s why I suspect several ideas seems complicated in words is just uncorrect constructed and may be clearly illustrated by images and others tools. Language is an obstacle sometimes. It needs to be corrected by another tools ans so be more flexible.
    • thumb
      Oct 2 2013: Thanks Anna,
      Language can indeed be an obstacle to understanding at times....I agree with that idea!

      I assume this is a response to my question..."Are you saying that we sometimes do not understand or apply the ideas generated with philosophizing?"

      Are you aware of the feature which allows us to answer directly to a comment, rather than going to the top of the page? See the little red "reply" in the right top corner of the comment? It keeps the comments in sequence:>)
      • thumb
        Oct 2 2013: Thank you for understanding, Colleen,
        yes it was the answer. I founded uncorrect to say just "yes" or "no" so I hope the explanation shows the meaning.
        May be it is good to consern the issue closes to your question: In case we do understand and apply the ideas of philosophizing, is it ecological to real life or not? Ecological thinking in strategic mode with system understanding.

        That way it`s possible to found a brunch of philosophy better die then alive although some people understand it and even apply to real life.
        • thumb
          Oct 3 2013: Thank you too Anna....it is enjoyable to exchange ideas with you:>)

          I notice that you applied the philosophy regarding the "reply" feature.....well done my friend:>)
    • Oct 3 2013: "The map is not the territory." You are familiar with Afred Korzybski? But let us go further back than this. Likewise, Kant and Hegel would certainly have stated that a symbol is not the object symbolized. Western philosophy has long recognized this--indeed, it recognizes this so strongly that it sees no need to point it out.
      • thumb
        Oct 4 2013: Unfortunately such things recognized once isn`t enough. Philosophy based on words only tends to bejust a map without any territory at all, being a self sufficient thing like computer games. Being inside a good rendered computer world people recognized it as a special kind of territory, not a map, the far from real life is the best... Good for films like "Avatar" (however it has simple human philosophy).

        It could be an indicator of philosophy: when people starts to make new maps with whole enthusiasm, playing with words, but without practice, it could be a game with mapping so philosophy comes to be artificial and probably dead.

        We told about philosophy generally.
        • Oct 5 2013: In the West, the tendency is called "ivory tower". The problem has been known for a long time, and philosophers like Bentham, Wittgenstein (later), Pierce, and Moore. However, while influential, they are not the dominant trend among professional academic philosophy faculty.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.