Compare and Contrast
Philosophy
Introduction
It is not surprising that not most of the people are understanding the context of philosophy. From a person not inclined with its concept, phisolosphy can be viewed as boring, irrelevant to the real-world application, and yet very much intriguing. On the other hand, it is not so difficult to put a finger on what really is its purpose, what phisolosphers do, and how its principles relate to human existence. However, the answer to those questions can be found in analyzing how it is viewed by different philosophers and what their perspectives about the subject pertains. The discussion will explore the contradictions and the similarities between the views of Brian Coffey and Bertrand Russell on philosophy. Furthermore, the discussion will also determine the context of philosophy, how and to whom it is valuable, who can practice it, the kind of value it has and ways it is valuable, and what philosophers do. At the very least, it can be assumed that the understanding of philosophy is unanimous in every philosophers regardless of their perspective and that is the love of wisdom.
What is Philosophy?
Defining philosophy begins with Russell’s view of it as a result of wrong conception of the end of life and partly because of the wrong conception of goodness (1912). Like all other studie, philosophy aims to explore knowledge through wisdom. In contrast to what Coffey believes as what defines philosophy, it turns out that the answer in itself is also philosophical in nature. Coffey conveyed similatities in terms of expressing the general idea of philosophy, which is the love of wisdom (2013). On the other hand, Coffey explained the context of philosophy on a more specific approach where it has been divided into three areas of knowledge. These three areas are referred to as ethics, which is the study of what is right or wrong, the other area deals with the study of knowledge referred to as epistemology, and lastly metaphysics, which is the study of what exists and what it is like. In contrary to how philosophy was defined by older generation of philosophers such as Russell, this body of knowledge was explicitly represented as a unity of systems resulting to a critical examination prejudice, beliefs, and conviction (1912).
Although, the definition by Coffey and Russell was similar at some extent, such description of philosophy is still rather an abstract term. However, one of the defining attributes of philosophy that is easier to grasp is the word “wisdom”. Therefore, in layman’s term philosophy as an expression of wisdom where being wise is an initiative to live or die gloriously by leading a life of goodness despite the troubled existence. Others may perceived meaning of philosophy as a way of interpreting the meaning of happiness (Russell, 1912). On the contrary, the notion of happiness can be the conveyance of chirfulness and joy, but for some philosophers happiness is having a sense of fullfillment constituted by suffering a lot of pain, which at some point in life is also necessary. In this regard, searching for the right answer as to what philosophy is subjective to the perspective towards what the person or philosopher deemed fit to his values.
What philosophers do and who can practice it?
It is apparen that philosophy in itself is a question that may be a difficult question to answer or has no definite answer (Coffey, 2013). In this sense, if philosophy is a question that has no definite form of definition, then it is likely that its practice and the question of what philosophers do might as well be a challenging question to ask. The Coffey and Russell’s view of what philosophers do is contradicting at some extent. In Russell’s argument of what philosophers do, he stated that philosophy including its practice by philosophers is an attempt to answer questions that has no definite answers. This assumption was drawn from his statement that “if you ask a mathematician, a minerologist, a historian his answer would be as long as you are willing to listen, but if you ask a philosopher of the same question he have to confess that his study (philosophy) has not achieved positive results as compared to what have been achieved by other scoences” (Russell, 1912, p. 14).
In this sense, what a philosopher does largely involves the pursuit of wisdom. Since there is no answer to match the factual representation that other sciences can provide, a philosopher on the other hand provides wisdom and logical sense, which other sciences are lacking. However, Coffey made a clear imposition of what philosophers do by examining the myths and the truth behind philosophy. In contrast to Russell’s viewpoint, philosopers do search for correct answers to a variety of interesting questions. Secondly, philosophers eliminate potential false answers through reasoning, and lastly, through reasoning that philosophers are able to support the answers that are true (Coffey, 2013). Given the context of what philosophers do, it is apparent that philosophy and its practice is not limited to philosophers themselves, but even common individuals could practice the love of wisdom to think through the matters if daily existence and making sense of the world. However, in practical and professional practice, philosophy is fundamental part of functioning for psychologists, psychiatrists, educators, and counsellors.
If philosophy and its intricacies of reasoning is a vital component in the pursuit of wisdom and knowledge, therefore it can be assumed that it is in fact valuable. However, another question surfaces and that is to whom philosophy is valuable if it’s indeed valuable. Russell (1912) addressed this question by highlighting the value of philosophy as a utility to explore unsuspected possibilities. In this regard, philosophy is valuable to the life of an instinctive man that shuts up within the circle of his private interest, which is his family and friends, but the outher world is disregarded except if the circumstances might hinder the wishes that comes to affect his private interests (Russell, 1912, p. 15). Similarly, this view about to whom philosophy is valuable conincides with Coffey’s position on the matter. According to Coffey (2013), philosophy is valuable to all individuals as its practice can be done by anyone who have the reason to believe on what they believe is reasonable.
In this regard, to whom philosophy is valuable brings the question back to how it started and how it shaped the society it onces became a vital part of learning. Drawing on the contributions of the big names in philosophy from Plato to Descartes, it is apparent that their contributions have had an impact towards the society during their time. It was deemed valuable to the society as the cornerstone of knowledge, and as Russell and Coffey believes, philosophy is still as valuable to the larger society as it was in the ancient times. Although not everyone in todays contemporary society would openly appreciate the value of philosophy as a paramount of reason, philosophys is still a way to enalrge the conception of what is possible that helps to eliminate the dogmatic assurance and enrichment of intellectual imagination (Russell, 1912).
The kind of value philosophy has and the ways it is valuable
Articulating on the kind of value that philosophy has and the ways it is valuable brings the discussion to Russell’s perspective of its utility. According to Russel (1912), philosophy is valuable as a utility to show unsuspecting possibilities in which the greatness of objects is being contemplated. As a result, one could achieve freedom from his personal and narrow aims resulting from contemplation (Russell, 1912, p.15). Given that philosophy is a utility of seeking the possibilities of greatness through contemplation, it leads to the realization of philosophy that is largely a pursuit of of its very own uncertainty. In many ways, men that are highly influenced by practical affairs and science view philosophy as concerning which knowledge is impossible. Similarly, Coffey’s view of philosophical value is realtively the parallel to Russell’s perspectives. For one, philosophy flourishes when people of vast diversity embraces its context to seek possibilities despite the homogeneous nature of the Philosophical canon (Coffey, 2013).
In the pursuit of wisdom pholosphers often contemplate on the matters of knowledge by asking bigger questions, which at some point enabled them to develop skill sets that are central to making sense of the world. People do not often dare to ask the bigger questions or leave the constraints of seeking for the answers to the larger and much experienced experts. On the other hand, leaving the larger questions to experts in many of the general and larger body of knowledge makes people not very wise. One of the important value that both Russell and Coffey conveyed on their statements is that philosophy enables us to provide reason to all aspects of common sense. In the scheme of reasoning and believing that what is conceived is the truth, the pholosophical ways as both Russell and Coffey conveyed suggests that its value is not just towards the people who study it, but rather the effect of holding on to what was perceived as the truth. In effect, the value of philosophy in practical application is to foster change in the life of the person practicing philosophy hence, if anywhere, that such value should be sought.
Conclusion
In many ways, pholosophy can be described as an easy yet a difficult subject matter to comprehend at the same time. The common conception about its purpose stems from the pursuit of knowledge that leads the philosophers to enrich reasoning in order to give sense to the world. There might have been similarities and differneces on how philosophy was viewed by its practitioners, but one thing remains constant, and that is the fact that philosophy is indeed valuable to thos who are seeking the truth about what they believed to be the truth. The value of philosophy cannot be measured by the knowledge it creates, but its imapct towards reasoning.
References
Coffey, B. (2013). What is Philosophy? Part 1. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IsUkjDGwDS4&list=PL_U5speHAei2R5349Z6qcyBPqdGeZCEw8
Coffey, B. (2013). What is Philosophy? Part 2. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cul-iSdI3sA&index=2&list=PL_U5speHAei2R5349Z6qcyBPqdGeZCEw8
Coffey, B. (2013). What is Philosophy? Part 3. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uA5Bj6eCqeo&list=PL_U5speHAei2R5349Z6qcyBPqdGeZCEw8&index=3
Russell, B. (2001). The value of philosophy. In B. Russell, The Problems of Philosophy (2nd ed., pp. 14-15). New York: Oxford University Press.
