Welcome to another blog series. Sometimes, I don’t complete the series that I start, but in all cases, something along the way is worth it. Thanks for reading this far. To keep this from being 100,000 words, I will need to refer to other existing discussions, like the title itself. Bigger thinkers than me have questioned the usefulness of philosophy in an age of science. People like Lawrence Krauss and E.O. Wilson. I won’t recreate their arguments here and may not specifically reference them as I address their concerns. It’s a big question. I’m not out to win the debate.
Succinctly, for me, it matters because in this age of
science, we have people with uniforms, authorized by their government, to cut
off the breath of life of another, in public, until they are dead. This is
debated. In some countries, if you try to debate it, you will join the dead. In
industrialized democracies, you still need lawyers and new legal precedents to
win the case that such actions are wrong. That is a debate I am out to win.
Very recently, I purchased a beverage, legally, publicly,
that was made by a company owned by women. The beverage contained some THC. A
half of a lifetime ago, there were very few companies owned by women, and
buying, selling, and imbibing THC was illegal. Because of that, I lived outside
the law for a couple decades, risking a felony offense almost every day. I had
a lot of time to think about what is moral and right. For this one example, the
state I live in finally caught up to me.
When a rich and powerful person claims they can act in ways
that others can’t, that is an expression of a philosophy. It’s a statement that
human nature and some imagined natural laws justify oppressing others, taking
what isn’t theirs, and invading others bodily autonomy. To me, it shows that
powerful person did not spend much time reflecting on what it is to be human
and how we develop society to match natural laws, or if there are any. It shows
that anyone can jumble words and have them appear to have a basis in logic and
reason. I want to talk about how we can examine if those words are reasonable.
I imagine before explaining why philosophy matters, you should try explaining what philosophy is?
ReplyDeleteTo touch on a point you made.
Do you think we have philosopher to thank for increasing woman's equality?