A note on general philosophy
Student, 12.2008
Our philosophical quest is so large and intricate that it
is difficult to know where to begin. Indeed there may be no self-evident place
to start and the various topics of philosophical investigation are intermingled
in a vast continuous web. It is often said that philosophy in its purest form
has no subject matter and is more correctly construed as a skill. Yet there is
an underlying realisation that underpins the philosophical investigation. It is
as much a matter of form as it is an observed predicament of the human
condition. Philosophical investigation, it seems, begins in the individual. The
philosophical mind belongs exclusively to an individual and the factors that
form the mind of the philosopher, such as experiences, are specific to the
individual. The philosophical framework is ultimately dependant on the
individual mind. This simple realisation impacts on form when we understand
that a single individual may not necessarily be privy to the experiences of
another mind. In absence of the entire repertoire of the philosophical
experience that has ever occurred in history, a single individual is limited in
resources to have the entire picture of the human experience as it has
transpired throughout the universe. Humbleness and respect for the experience
of other minds is therefore in order as we come into contact with them, such as
when we share our philosophical thoughts and investigations. “No man is an
island, entire of itself; every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the
main,” says Donne [1]. However, in absence of clear
evidence suggesting otherwise, it would seem that we may indeed be little
islands of philosophical thinkers in the sense that we do not directly
experience the minds of others. However, where language fails, other forms of
art like music and painting are an amazingly powerful tool to convey the human
spirit and emotions of other minds. Arguably it is indeed a capacity for
philosophising, along with the ability to create art, that defines and proves
our humanity and sets us apart from the beast. “He hangs between; in doubt to
act, or rest; In doubt to deem himself a God, or Beast;” says Pope [2], realising that while we are
not beasts we have streaks of “divinity”. This capacity for philosophy and art
could be indeed our “divine” component, although the usage of the word “divine”
is arguable here. There is a strong case to show that language and art can
create strong connections between the islands that we form. Most of the time,
we seem to understand each other’s experiences or we are enriched by learning
from them. With the exception of extremist solipsists, we acknowledge the
existence of other minds, and we can often share experience in very powerful
and meaningful ways that are often mutually enriching. Many maintain that
exposure to discourse can only enrich an individual’s position, and an already open
mind cannot be closed by listening to others.
We must therefore conduct philosophical discourse with
some sense of humility and respect for the experiences others may have an that
we may be missing. But philosophical inquiry is open to all minds, and often,
we know we have converged upon the meaningful questions when we collectively
fail to answer them, or when they have far-reaching repercussions on many.
I here add a quick note of form: I have chosen to make
the binding text of these documents in English to reach a maximum audience and
because English is fast inheriting the important niche of the common global
language. It is not meant to undermine any linguistic group.
1. Donne,
J., Meditation #17 From Devotions upon
Emergent Occasions. 1623.
2. Pope, A., An Essay on Man. 1734.
