Philosophy: Understanding Its Core Principles and Evolution

Posted on Dec 14, 2024 in Philosophy and ethics

Introduction to Philosophy: Key Concepts and History

We all philosophize at some point in our lives. We become uncomfortable when difficult questions arise, breaking the ingenuity by which we see the world. We think for ourselves, become independent, and search for answers. But what moves us to philosophize?

This philosophical question has no single answer. Karl Jaspers, in his book, Introduction to Philosophy, based his response on three reasons:

Wonder: Our eyes make us see the wonderful spectacle of the universe of which we are a part. Our admiration makes us want to know; that is, we ask what causes our astonishment, our wonder.
Doubt: Doubt arises when we become aware of the uncertainty of human knowledge. Each solution brings a new problem and the possibility of error.
Limit Situations: When there are difficult times in our lives—death, disease, failures, etc.—the question of the meaning and value of our existence arises.

The Meaning of the Word “Philosophy”

Etymological sense: “Philosophy” is a Greek word. “Philo” means love or desire, and “Sophia” means wisdom or knowledge. Therefore, it means love of wisdom.

A philosopher is a lover of knowledge and is opposed to the one who seems wise, the one who possesses knowledge. The philosopher wants to know because they are aware of their ignorance. The wise do not want to know because they already have knowledge.

Human knowledge is imperfect. Therefore, we can be philosophers but not wise. To philosophize is to want to know; it is likely to never stop feeling the desire to know.

According to our interpretation, philosophy is wisdom that comes from love because we love life. The philosopher is a lover.

The philosopher:

Is faithful in what they think and lives accordingly.
Does not support inconsistencies.
Seeks to agree with others.
Loves others and their ideas, intending to improve society.
Understands the world to help transform it.
Lives without safe solutions.
Can be wrong.
Knows their path has no end.

Historical Beginning of Philosophy in the West

Philosophy has existed since humans have existed and will cease to exist only if the human species becomes extinct. Philosophy had its beginnings 2500 years ago in Greece. In the 6th century BC, a new way of thinking began to develop in Greece, trying to understand the world without resorting to the gods. Thinkers used reason.

The philosopher Anaxagoras asserted that the sun and comets were incandescent rocks, the moon was cold stone, and thunder was a collision between clouds.
The philosopher Xenophanes criticized that the gods had human form.
The philosopher Protagoras said to be investigating nature without thinking of the gods.
Democritus said that everything was made up of atoms.

These explanations are distinguished from the mythical explanations of the time. Rational explanation does not resort to the gods; ideas emerge from necessity and law. What happens in nature can be understood by our reason.

Philosophy is the thirst for knowledge, the need to respond to the fundamental questions of our existence. It has no historical beginning; this time is an achievement of Western culture itself.

Philosophy and Science

In the beginning, science and philosophy were not separate as they are in our times. The first philosophers dealt with all issues of knowledge. Philosophers like Aristotle wrote about issues relating to biology, physics, astronomy, and philosophy. Knowledge was unified; there were no scientific disciplines and specialties. Knowledge was very limited and could be covered by the same person. Since modern times, science and philosophy have separated.

Galileo separated physics from philosophy. At present, there is growing scientific knowledge that has no limits. Thus, new sciences and new specialties were born. Each science investigates an aspect of reality.

Similarities and Differences Between Philosophy and Science

Similarities:

They want to give rational explanations.
They are opposed to mythical explanations and unfounded opinions.
They demand justification for what is believed, as well as for dogmas, prejudices, and superstitions.
They have no fear of the unknown.
They look to know instead of finding ignorance.

Differences:

Philosophy has no universally valid results: Each philosopher develops their own philosophy and gives answers to their own questions, which may be contradictory. For some, the ability of human reason has no limits; for others, we can only know what is shown to us in experience.

Science gives answers that can be corroborated and accepted by all scientists, e.g., the theory of evolution of species.

Philosophy does not progress: The answers given by philosophers are never definitive. To study philosophy, you study the great thinkers of history. If it progressed, what was said by philosophers of earlier centuries would have no effect today.

The history of science is progressive: Older scientists are overcome by the present, as they know more.

Philosophy seeks universal knowledge:

It has no special interests.
It does not want to know a specific area of reality.
It deals with any topic.
Its questions are general.

Science fragments reality to know it.

Problems of Philosophy

In philosophy, the answers are varied, and the questions are very similar. Philosophers are distinguished by their responses but are identified by a desire to know. Different questions have resulted in branches of philosophy:

Metaphysics: What is reality? What is real?
Theory of Knowledge: What is knowledge? What is truth?
Philosophical Anthropology: What is man? Does he have a soul?
Ethics: What is good? What is evil?
Aesthetics: What is beautiful? What is ugly?
Philosophy of Science: What constitutes scientific objectivity?
Political Philosophy: What is politics? What gives legitimacy to a government?
Philosophy of History: Are there laws of history? What differs from the laws of nature?

What is Logic?

All reasoning is thought, but not all thought is reasoning. In reasoning, thoughts lead to a conclusion, which leads to a statement that ends the argument.

Logic is the study of methods to distinguish correct reasoning from incorrect reasoning. It deals with reasoning already formed, expressed in writing or orally. This is not to be confused with any branch of psychology. It gets into the field of psychology. It is a science that provides methods to tell when an argument is correct or not.

Those who study logic reason more correctly than those who have never been concerned with these issues.

The distinction between correct and incorrect reasoning is the central problem of logic. Logic does not address whether what is said in an argument is true or false; it deals with the structure of reasoning, and it is irrelevant whether the form of this reasoning is correct.

The Functions of Language

The Informative Function:

When language is used to communicate information.
To describe incidents.
To think about the reality that surrounds us.
To convey ideas.
Prevails in scientific discourse.

Logic is interested solely in this function of language.

The Expressive Function:

When we use language to communicate feelings or to arouse certain emotions in the other.
The intention is not to transmit information.

The Directive Function:

Is met if we use language in order to cause or prevent action.

The Mixed Use of Language:

The functions of language have a certain similarity with some grammatical features:

The indicative mood is appropriate for information.
The imperative mood is appropriate for orders or pleas.

In everyday use, these characteristics are different.

Definition

To define a word is to clarify its meaning.

To communicate better, it is necessary to know the terms we use, that is, the sense in which we use a word in a given context.

Types of Definitions

Verbal: Communicates the meaning of a word using other words, e.g., “book.”
Ostensive: Uses an example to give meaning to a term, e.g., “white cotton clouds.”
Denotative: Refers to the extension of a term, e.g., “planets: Mercury, Venus, Mars, etc.”
Intentional: Sets forth defining characteristics attributed to certain concepts, e.g., “planet: opaque, light blue, reflecting sunlight.”

Fallacies

Fallacy: Invalid arguments designated by errors.

Formal Fallacies: Its premises and conclusion are true, and the error is to take the truth as a warranty.

Fallacy of Affirming the Consequent: The conclusion does not follow from the statement of the premise.
Denial of the Antecedent: The conclusion is drawn from true premises.

Informal Fallacies: Have a flaw in the structure in relation to the premise and conclusion. They are divided into two:

Fallacies of Relevance: Their premises do not have logical relevance with respect to their conclusion. They seek to persuade, using expressive and informative functions.

Argument from Mercy: Produced by appealing to piety, e.g., a man kills his wife and says he is innocent because she was unfaithful.
Fallacy Against the Person: Attacking the person for their specific qualities, e.g., it is fallacious to say that the minister’s plan is worthless because he is an alcoholic.
Appeal to the People: Committed by directing an emotional appeal to the people, common in political discourse and/or advertising.
Appeal to Authority: Seeks to justify what one says by referring to a famous example, e.g., if a star appears in a TV advertisement depicting a product for weight loss but does not describe it.
Appeal to Force: When there is no reason to defend an idea, force or threat is used, e.g., a criminal tells a witness that if he betrays him, he will face the consequences.
Argument from Ignorance: Supports a true position because no one proved it to be false, or vice versa, e.g., there are aliens because nobody proved otherwise.

Fallacies of Ambiguity: Appear in arguments whose meaning changes in the course of the argument.

Equivocation: The same word is allocated different meanings, e.g., “All animals are living beings. Some animals are beings who have died. This tells us that some people who have died are alive.” The phrase “living” is taken as organic beings and as those currently living.
Fallacy of Composition: The parts of a whole are said to have the same properties, e.g., it is said that a car is nice because its parts are beautiful.
Fallacy of Division: What is true for the whole is argued to be true for each of the parts, e.g., the white tiger at the zoo will be extinguished because all white tigers are becoming extinct.