“Philosophy” was for many years considered a crowning field in Western Society, though in our current era it has been deemed an “impractical” hobby in which people with too much time on their hands ask pointless questions. It has not always been this way, and I hope to prove that using history, because the more you learn about history and philosophy, the more you realize that these subjects are inseparable.
Philosophy in the West began in Ancient Greece, when so-called “philosophers” (“Philosophy” meaning “love of wisdom”) would discuss broad questions about the fundamental nature of the world. Generally, this took on a pseudo-scientific nature: “What is everything made out of? Some would say that everything is actually made of water, but I propose that it is actually made of fire!” As humble a beginning as this was, it was a beginning nonetheless. This frivolous speculation of the world, however, took on a brand new light with the life of Socrates (c. 470 – 399 BC), the true founder of Western philosophy. This curious philosopher took to asking questions to learn about the world, and as his reputation grew, one of his friends was said to have asked an oracle whether there was anybody wiser than Socrates. When Socrates was told that an oracle declared he was the wisest person in the world, he was dumbfounded and decided to prove that he was not. He did this by approaching people who were considered the wisest in their respective fields, then proceeded to try and learn from them to get to the heart of the subject matter. Usually, these respected authorities would crumble after only a few thoughtful questions, demonstrating that they really only had a superficial knowledge of the world. On the other hand, Socrates sought to reach the very core of reality, causing quite a ruckus, challenging longstanding societal assumptions. As is common with people standing for the truth, he was executed for his defiance of the social norm. In Socratic fashion, he accepted his unjust death with gusto. HERE! What Socrates understood, that others did not, is that truth does not rely on what the people around us say it is: it relies on itself. The more that we take the world around us at face value, the less we really understand the world. The more we dig deep, the more we put ourselves at odds with the world. The more we put ourselves at odds with the world, the easier it is to make it a better place because we are not obligated to take it at face value anymore.
After Socrates died, he was immortalized through the writings of his student, Plato. Plato even ventured to try to answer some of the questions Socrates raised, and eventually his own student, Aristotle, would famously go on to develop very complex theories using the Socratic method. The work of the Greeks would be inherited by the Romans, and then, when Christianity came to prominence, many theologians, such as Saint Augustine, adopted the philosophical, investigative attitude towards their own beliefs. The Medieval Age saw a blossoming of religious philosophy, culminating in the intricate theological works of Thomas Aquinas, who sought to thoroughly work through every element of the Christian faith by applying Aristotle’s logic to the Bible. Then came the Enlightenment.
When a rubber band is pulled too much, it often snaps. The Enlightenment, as one of the most significant turning points in history, began with a fervent interest in logic. Disagreeing geniuses like Descartes, Spinoza, and Leibniz all pushed logic to the limits in their own unique ways, constructing world views from scratch. Regardless of whether one admires this constant appeal to logic, it is no doubt unconventional. Depending on how you view it, Descartes trying to ignore as much as he can of the world around him so that he can only deal with pure logic is either a noble, otherworldly adventure or simply a waste of time. One person who thought it was a waste of time was David Hume, who would bring philosophy into new waters by raising the question of whether logic was even real to begin with! His answer was a firm “no,” his claim being that logic is only a tool that our brain invented to navigate the world, as opposed to a real thing that exists outside of ourselves. As minor a difference as this may seem, this was as groundbreaking a claim as one could make. While many understandably wrote this off as nonsense, a man by the name of Immanuel Kant realized that, though some of Hume’s conclusions may have been far-fetched, there was some truth behind his thinking. Awakened from his “dogmatic slumbers,” Kant would spend most of his life trying to prove that logic was real in the first place (of course, using rigorous logic to do so), but the damage had already been done, and logic had lost its high place. Hume’s claims not only affected nerdy intellectuals, but would changed the course of history by their use as political and ideological ammunition. For example, Enlightenment thinkers who opposed religious organizations no longer argued with logic about the existence of God because, to them, that kind of abstract battle did not mean anything anymore. Hume’s claims prompted many more developments in its wake, such as Existentialism, which came to prominence in the late 1800s and early 1900s. Existentialism is essentially a field of philosophy that focuses on the meaning of life, but usually on a more personal level as opposed to grand “let’s do some systematic analysis and figure out what we are all supposed to be doing.” Existentialism will often take a very psychological nature, being focused more on the individual than the world around the individual lives in.
While this brief sketch only scratches the surface, it maps out the general lay of the land and should make it at least a little easier to jump into reading and discussing philosophy. If you do not remember anything else but this, I believe it helps to view Western Philosophy as having gone through two basic doors. The first, that of Socrates in the Fourth Century BC, opened up the search for the truth, while the second, that of Hume and Kant in the 18th Century, opened up the question of whether that truth ever existed in the first place. Of course, much more happened in between, but that is an educational adventure that I hope you will continue, however little or much.
With the recent formation of the Siena Philosophy Society, we are looking for curious members of our student body to join us in discussing this important subject. As the new club president, I hope to make this club a space where anyone can bring their opinions to the table (and under the microscope!). Whether we end up building up mutual ideas or end up engaging in ideological kickboxing, it will be a place where your ideas can develop! If I do my job right, this should be a bastion of free speech like no other, as long as you are up to honest back-and-forth discussion.