Is Western Philosophy a Failure?

answers1: By you categorizing and somewhat pointedly criticizing
Western thought, it sounds that you already have made up your mind or
tend to prefer eastern or some other ideal for thought. You should
not consider a philosophy a failure only because you do not see its
merits. What works for one person doesn't work for all(ie.
christianity as opposed to polytheism). You can argue all day about a
philosophy, but philosophy does not exist as an absolute, it is given
credence and validity when one chooses to accept it and act upon it.
Arguing or trying to find a philosophy of absolute wholeness or
goodness is like shooting down someones opinion for liking green
instead of blue, or even worse, trying to convince them that that
because of my experience in philosophy, you should accept my thoughts
as absolute truth. There are plenty or alternate philosophies that
people have found fault with, not only in western philosophy, but
eastern, middle eastern and all forms or religious philosophies.
answers2: Well, sokrates, I think it's a bit premature to summarily <br>
conclude that Western Philosophy as a whole is "a <br>
colossal failure". This is because Philosophy, like <br>
civilization itself, is still in its infancy. Because of this, <br>
it is somewhat silly to look for perfection in Philosophy, <br>
and then to dismiss it outright because you fail to find <br>
it. In truth, a perfect philosophy may never be achieved <br>
as long as human beings themselves remain imperfect. <br>
Moreover, Sophia has yet to really stand upon Her own <br>
two feet with strength and nobility. <br>
. <br>
Consider Her brief biography as a whole: Philosophy <br>
was born into a world dominated by myths, fears, and <br>
superstitions, and yet somehow managed to invent logic <br>
and science. Soon after this, however, Sophia was made <br>
to act the role of Theology's whore; which could only <br>
have a detrimental effect upon the philosophical <br>
enterprise. For most of Her career, then, She was a <br>
slave; and yet somehow progress was still made (albeit <br>
very slowly). And then, after Descartes, She was able <br>
to regain most of Her stolen independence; and then <br>
philosophers multiplied like mushrooms after a rain- <br>
storm. <br>
. <br>
But then the academics boldly seized Philosophy, <br>
claimed Her as their own, and promptly turned Her <br>
into Science's whore. And that's where we are today! <br>
Therefore, and considering all the abuse that has been <br>
heaped upon the Fair Lady's head over the centuries, I <br>
think that Sophia has acquitted Herself very well indeed. <br>
And once She has been freed from the shackles and <br>
chains of a blind, arrogant, and narrow-minded Science, <br>
She will do remarkable things. In truth, Sophia's full <br>
potential has yet to be realized. <br>
. <br>
> [snipsome] Maybe we should analyze it as one might <br>
> study a cadaver. It is an object of interest from which <br>
> many things can be learned, maybe even some things <br>
> of benefit. <br>
. <br>
Well, sokrates, these statements tell me all I need <br>
to know. The problem is NOT within Philosophy; the <br>
problem is within *you*. Specifically with your attitude. <br>
Philosophy is NOT dead; although the scientific and <br>
analytical academics have certainly done their very best <br>
to kill Sophia by sucking any signs of life right out of <br>
Her. They kill Her slowly by centimeters and inches, and <br>
then berate Her for looking like a cadaver. And never for <br>
a moment will they take responsibility for the evil that <br>
they have committed. No indeed, they would much <br>
rather blame Her for what *they* have done to Her! ... <br>
"an object of interest", you say? "analyze it", you say? <br>
... Analyze this --> [insert extremely rude gesture here] <br>
. <br>
> But we do well to avoid treating western philosophy <br>
> as a living entity, one that can provide ethico- <br>
> metaphysical guidance or enlightenment. <br>
. <br>
Really? Why, sokrates, that's just the sort of statement <br>
I would expect to hear from a thoughtless and brutal <br>
*scientist* who would joyfully kill off the last surviving <br>
member of a unique and astonishing species just so that <br>
he could then *analyze* its internal organs in order to <br>
discover 'what makes it tick'! As for myself, I do indeed <br>
see Philosophy as "a living entity, one that can provide <br>
ethico-metaphysical guidance or enlightenment". I see <br>
Sophia as a large and flourishing garden that holds and <br>
nourishes a wide variety of flowers and plants: roses, <br>
tulips, lemons, apples, peanuts, and yes, the occasional <br>
weed or three. <br>
. <br>
And no philosopher is ever *completely* dead so long as <br>
there is at least one living human mind able to read his <br>
writings with some small measure of understanding. If <br>
human immortality exists anywhere in this sad world, it <br>
is only within the warm bosom of loving Sophia. Treat <br>
Her like the Lady She is, you arrogant baboon, and THEN <br>
you'll see that there is still some life and value in the <br>
old girl after all ... *Maybe!* ... There's an old saying in <br>
computer science that applies equally well to Philosophy: <br>
garbage in, garbage out. <br>
. <br>
P.S. "The goal of Philosophy is not to know the world, <br>
but rather to put men on the right path." -- Heraclitus
answers3: The Laws of Nature govern the planet we live on <br>
<br>
The Laws of our Sun govern the life on this planet we live on <br>
<br>
We are only a product of universal curiosity <br>
<br>
Antiquity inquired many ideas and concerns about life <br>
<br>
the 21st century has condemned any possible philosophical system, for
it brings humankind the ultimate purpose <br>
<br>
a long life span that will reach 150 years of age for those who will
afford it <br>
<br>
even lodges today have become PR clubs <br>
<br>
the system you seek for reason will not exist in the west until the
poverty reaches the middle classes and pain is felt accross nations
after the present economic system fails for them. <br>
<br>
In history all great societies died due to lake of philosophical vision <br>
<br>
philosophia = Sophi Phili
answers4: you are quoting written forms of philosophy, there are
others, the philosophy of the working class, the unwritten economic
philosophy <br>
of the west. which we all pay lip service to but deny on our tax
returns. The wests societies are based on such economic policies. <br>
if it aint broke, dont try fixing it. have you ever wondered in your
ivory tower why there are such an abundance of accountants/tax lawers.
<br>
ours is a system based on working practice, no matter what is written,
trying to find answers to a philosophy of concience will only give you
a headache, there are only questions, dont you think if plato knew the
answer he would have told us. regards LF
answers5: Eliminate the tendency to pander to Semitic Theology and the
technocratic influences of Morbis Mathematicus and the glint of light
will show!
answers6: I think Dr. Cress-Welding as already answered that question
in the "Isis Papers." Though she was specifially referring to
westeren psychology, I think what she says is true about all western
thought, in that it is a failure because it does not seek to expalin
(or sometimes even acknoledge the persistence of) the single biggest
intellectual phenomenon in the last 2000 years and that is the
developement and perpetuation of white supremacist acculturation.
answers7: Your conclusions will be challenged, I am sure, by
philosophers on this site. They are your conclusions. I have made the
same conclusion about Eastern philosophy. You complain about finding a
philosophical system that holds under analytical scrutiny, without
mentioning John Searle, our greatest analytical philosopher. What
really gives philosophy a bad name, is those relativistic, post-modern
pseudo-intellectuals from France. Foucault, Derrida, Lacan and the
like. With this incoherent drivel being still extant, how can one get
to actual philosophy? <br>
<br>
PS Of course, Searle's philosophy is not tenable as a life philosophy,
as it is analytical in nature. A life philosophy is rather personal,
to ones self, don't you think? That is why I really hate Derrida and
company. They promise a utopia that they have no idea on how to get to
and if gotten to, by their ideas, would not work anyway. I guess you
need to set your own life philosophy.