Philosophy is possibly the most fascinating subject I've ever studied.
The most basic thing to know about philosophy is that it's essentially about questions. Difficult questions. They can sound easy, but they're not. Here are a few examples of the "classic" philosophical questions:
What is truth?
What is good?
What is justice?
What exists?
What is knowledge?
What's the difference between animals and humans?
Do we have souls?
Can machines think?
Pretty much every one of these questions is so huge as to require a separate discipline within philosophy dedicated to answering it. These questions can (probably) never be answered to everyone's satisfaction, but the more we interrogate a concept, the more clearly we can see what it is, and what it is not.
Here are a few suggestions for beginning to read about philosophy:
Bertrand Russell - The Problems of Philosophy
This is one of the best introductions to the subject.
Rene Descartes - Discourse on Method
Written in the 17th century, but very clear, and a good way into reading classic philosophy.
Bad Thoughts - Jamie Whyte
A good modern introduction to flawed arguments (fallacies).
The Philosophy Gym - Stephen Law
An introduction to many of the "classic" philosophical problems, explained in a clear and friendly style.
Hopefully something there should be of interest; if you have any questions (and you will!) feel free to ask...
And remember, as Socrates once said: "The only thing I know is that I know nothing."
i dont get the quote
if he knows that he doesnt know anything then certainly he knows something doesnt he?
Yes, but that knowledge is seriously devalued by what he says afterwards!
He's making a simple point, which is that most people assume that having 'knowledge' means you are 100% certain of something, so he says 'Well, if that's the case then I know nothing, because I can never be 100% sure of anything'.
Think about it. Would you be confident enough to say you're 100% sure that something is the case? I don't think I would.
br. Shadow,
I would advise that a muslim does not waste their time with philosophy at least until they have a solid understanding of the creed of their religion. (Read the ruling on philosophy here). Philosophy does not lead one anywhere but instead it increases them in confusion and uncertainty, until the point where they even doubt if anything around them exists (solipsism)! This is why the majority of early scholars took a very strong stance against philosophy and they urged Muslims to stick to the Qur'an and the Sunnah. Imam Ghazali spent a period of his life in which he devoted himself to philosophy and went into much confusion and misguidance but later he recanted and called Muslims to the Qur'an and the Sunnah and warned them of the dangers of the incoherent nonsensical ramblings of philosophers.
The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) said: "Surely I was sent to perfect the qualities of righteous character" [Musnad Ahmad, Muwatta Mâlik]
br. Shadow,
I would advise that a muslim does not waste their time with philosophy at least until they have a solid understanding of the creed of their religion. (Read the ruling on philosophy here). Philosophy does not lead one anywhere but instead it increases them in confusion and uncertainty, until the point where they even doubt if anything around them exists (solipsism)! This is why the majority of early scholars took a very strong stance against philosophy and they urged Muslims to stick to the Qur'an and the Sunnah. Imam Ghazali spent a period of his life in which he devoted himself to philosophy and went into much confusion and misguidance but later he recanted and called Muslims to the Qur'an and the Sunnah and warned them of the dangers of the incoherent nonsensical ramblings of philosophers.
i didnt know that
but what about philosophical arguements, red herrings etc.
can i learn about fallacies?
it helps with debates
"The ancestor of every action is a thought."
Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803 - 1882)
i didnt know that
but what about philosophical arguements, red herrings etc.
can i learn about fallacies?
it helps with debates
Of course you can, please don't get me wrong when I say not to go into philosophy. I'm not talking about just studying logic and learning logical fallacies and methods of proofs, etc. I mean studying works of philosophy on existence, God, predestination, and other Islamic beliefs.
The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) said: "Surely I was sent to perfect the qualities of righteous character" [Musnad Ahmad, Muwatta Mâlik]
I would advise that a muslim does not waste their time with philosophy at least until they have a solid understanding of the creed of their religion. (Read the ruling on philosophy here). Philosophy does not lead one anywhere but instead it increases them in confusion and uncertainty, until the point where they even doubt if anything around them exists (solipsism)! This is why the majority of early scholars took a very strong stance against philosophy and they urged Muslims to stick to the Qur'an and the Sunnah. Imam Ghazali spent a period of his life in which he devoted himself to philosophy and went into much confusion and misguidance but later he recanted and called Muslims to the Qur'an and the Sunnah and warned them of the dangers of the incoherent nonsensical ramblings of philosophers.
Phew, Ansar, that's quite a merciless attack!
If the Islamic view is that people should learn about Islam first before moving on to philosophy, that's fair enough. In your post above, however, you give a very reductive account of philosophy as a whole, including some slightly misleading points.
For instance, not all philosophers are solipsists in practice. Although the idea of absolute solipsism is by its very nature irrefutable and non-falsifiable, the fact that we do not have certain knowledge about the existence of anything except our own minds does not massively alter the way we go about our daily lives (unless, of course, we are philosophers engaging with the problem).
Your point about Imam Ghazali is interesting. His journey between philosophy and faith is one of the most fascinating I have come across, and he is highly respected among Western philosophers, even though they do not really know what to make of his final dedication to Islam.
When you mention 'the incoherent nonsensical ramblings of philosophers', are those your words or his?
I'm not talking about just studying logic and learning logical fallacies and methods of proofs, etc. I mean studying works of philosophy on existence, God, predestination, and other Islamic beliefs.
I was going to bring up the point about logic, but you have already answered it. I'm glad that we can agree that the study of logic is very useful indeed. After all, without logicians, computers probably wouldn't have been invented by now, and we wouldn't be having this conversation!
On the other areas, the position seems to be 'these questions have already been answered, so there's no need for you to think about them.' It strikes me as being a shame that people are encouraged not to question these beliefs. Of course, according to Western philosophers, these questions have not been finally answered, so there is plenty of scope for fruitful discussion on them.
What about some of the other areas of philosophy, such as epistemology, phenomenology, aesthetics or philosophy of science? There are many concepts within these disciplines that are of crucial importance for the modern mind, and (perhaps due to my ignorance) I can't really see how knowledge of them is inimical to Islam.
Since you mention that philosophers dealing with questions of existence and god ought to be avoided by Muslims, I'd better retract all of my earlier recommendations except Whyte's Bad Thoughts, since the other three all consider these questions. Descartes' account of them is the most famous, and it even includes his proof of the existence of god, although he accomplishes it through demonstrably specious means.
that site i just gave contains philosophy i think
its made by muslims dudes most probably
is that the sort of philosophy thats useful?
or shud i just stick to learning about fallacies?
in school they only teach about famous philosophers for some reason
"The ancestor of every action is a thought."
Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803 - 1882)
The article on the site is not a work of philosophy, although it contains quotes from several philosophers. It's actually a religious text disguised as philosophy.
in school they only teach about famous philosophers for some reason
There's a reason why they're famous - they have each made fundamental contributions to the history of ideas. Your school is to be commended for offering the course. Are you studying philosophy at school now?
There's a reason why they're famous - they have each made fundamental contributions to the history of ideas. Your school is to be commended for offering the course. Are you studying philosophy at school now?
Peace
not yet, im gonna take the course next semester but im just interested to know what im headed for
plus my friend takes the course and he tells me that there is alot of essay writing to do
Im not sure how Philosophy and Essay writing are connected
ps. im learning about philosophy because of the awsome ability to debate
"The ancestor of every action is a thought."
Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803 - 1882)
not yet, im gonna take the course next semester but im just interested to know what im headed for
plus my friend takes the course and he tells me that there is alot of essay writing to do
Im not sure how Philosophy and Essay writing are connected
ps. im learning about philosophy because of the awsome ability to debate
I'd highly recommend doing the course, and you've got a good reason for doing it. If you can debate skilfully on philosophical subjects, you should be able to argue a strong case on pretty much any subject you're familiar with. It's important that you can develop and sustain an argument, so this is where the essays come in. To give you an idea of the kind of thing you might come across in exams, here are a few examples of essay questions I answered at university:
Is Descartes' "cogito ergo sum" ("I think, therefore I am") a tautology?
What is Russell's paradox? What is its importance?
How convincing do you find Hume's argument on miracles?
Is Kant's categorical imperative sufficient as a basis for morality?
Obviously you need to get to know what these concepts are before you can answer the questions - how about having a look around the internet to get some ideas? Then you could let me know what you think or ask questions if you need any help. It would be good preparation for the course.
Before that, how about this one as a starter to get you thinking:
I've got a better one than that, My Learned Friend!
How the heck do you pronounce 'Nietzche' anyway?
With the greatest respect, Your Honour, you need to check your spelling of 'Nietzsche' first...
His name is pronounced 'knee - cher'.
Nietzsche has the best prose style of any of the great philosophers. Although Kant is probably the greatest philosopher of the modern era, he was a dreadful writer - he's tedious compared to Nietzsche. Nietzsche's not a good read for beginners, though, as he's easily misunderstood. One such beginner who misunderstood him very badly was Adolf Hitler.
Nietzsche's attitude shines through in everything he wrote. The four chapters of his "autobiography", Ecce Homo, are titled as follows: Why I Am So Wise, Why I Am So Clever, Why I Write Such Good Books and Why I Am A Destiny. I love a writer with confidence!
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
When you create an account, we remember exactly what you've read, so you always come right back where you left off. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and share your thoughts. Sign Up
br. Shadow,
Hide
Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks