GST202:LOGI

C,PHI
LOSOPHYANDHUMANEXI
STENCE

NOTEONE

I
ntr
oduct
ionandDef
ini
ti
onofPhi
losophy

Gener
all
y,phi
l
osophy i
s descr
ibed as a di
ff
icul
t
subj
ectbecausei
tisseenascompl
exandobscur
e.
Tot
hequest
ion,‘
Whati
sphi
l
osophy
?’Oneanswer
t
hati
s pr
ovi
ded i
sthatphi
l
osophyi
s an act
ivi
ty
r
athert
han a subj
ectwhi
ch i
mpl
i
es t
haty
ou do
phi
losophyasopposed t
olear
ning abouti
t.The
ot
heri
sthatphi
l
osophyi
samat
terofconcept
ual
anal
ysi
swhi
chmeanst
hati
tinv
olv
est
hinki
ng.The
t
ermst
o‘phi
l
osophi
ze’or‘
anal
yze’suggestwhat
phi
l
osopher
sdo –t
heyt
hinkaboutquest
ionsand
howt
oanswert
hem.Thecommonel
ementt
othese
quest
ionsi
sthatt
heycanbeanswer
edbyv
irt
ueof
r
easoni
ng.
Weask,whyst
udyphi
l
osophywhenwebel
i
evei
tis
compl
exorobscur
e.West
udyphi
losophybecause
wewantt
osat
isf
youri
mpul
seofcur
iosi
ty.Ther
eis
t
hedesi
ret
o know t
hemeani
ng oft
hiswor
ldi
n
whi
ch we f
ind our
sel
ves, t
o under
stand t
he
si
gni
fi
cance,
andi
fpossi
ble,
discov
ert
hepur
poseof
humanl
i
fei
ngener
alandourownl
i
fei
npar
ti
cul
ar.
Phi
l
osophyasksquest
ionsl
i
ke:Doourf
ivesenses
pr
ovi
deat
ruer
epr
esent
ati
onoft
hewor
ldar
oundus?
Doesev
eryev
enthav
eacause?I
fev
eryev
enthasa
cause,
doesi
taf
fectt
hechoi
ceswemake?

Et
ymol
ogi
cal
l
y,t
he wor
d“phi
l
osophy
”is der
ived
f
rom t
woGr
eekwor
ds‘
Phi
l
os’and‘
Sophi
a’whi
ch
meanl
oveandwi
sdom r
espect
ivel
y.Theet
ymol
ogy
orr
ootmeani
ngt
her
efor
e,i
sthe‘
l
oveofwi
sdom’
.To
l
ovesomet
hingi
stodesi
rei
t.Thi
smeanst
hati
fwe
l
ovewi
sdom t
henweshoul
ddesi
rei
t.Accor
dingt
o
someschol
arsSocr
ates,
ananci
entAt
heni
ant
hinker
(
469-
399B.
C),
wassai
dtobet
hef
ir
stper
sont
ouse
t
hewor
d‘phi
l
osophy
’.Themaxi
m,“
know t
hysel
f”
emanat
ed f
rom t
he Gr
eek Del
phiOr
acl
e whi
ch
Socr
ates expounded wi
th t
he di
ctum, “
an
unexami
nedl
i
fei
snotwor
thl
i
ving”
.Thi
sdecl
arat
ion
ear
nedhi
mthehonourofbei
ngr
efer
redas“
wise”
becauseheear
nest
lyl
oved and pur
sued wi
sdom
si
ncer
ely
.Phi
l
osophyi
sint
erest
edi
nev
ery
thi
ngt
hat
exi
stssi
mpl
ybecausei
texi
sts,wi
thoutr
est
ri
cti
ons
ofanyki
nd.Unl
i
keot
herdi
sci
pli
nes,phi
losophyi
s
notat
heor
ybutav
isi
onofl
if
e.Thephi
l
osopheri
s
notj
ustaspect
atorbutat
ruepar
ti
cipantwhoi
s
i
nter
est
ed i
n l
i
fe wi
th i
ts r
eal meani
ng and
r
elat
ionshi
p.Aphi
l
osopheri
sconcer
nedwi
thhuman
bei
ngs, cr
eat
ion and t
he uni
ver
se i
n i
ts
compl
eteness.
We ear
li
er gav
e t
he et
ymol
ogi
cal meani
ng of
phi
l
osophyast
hel
ove,questorpur
sui
tofwi
sdom.
Var
iousschol
arshav
etr
ied t
o def
inephi
l
osophy
.
Socr
atesdef
inedphi
l
osophyas“
arat
ionalst
udyof
mor
al l
i
fe”
. Hence hi
s popul
ar di
ctum: an
unexami
ned l
i
fei
snotwor
thl
i
ving.Accor
ding t
o
Pl
ato,phi
l
osophyi
s“t
hel
ovef
ort
het
rut
h”.Locke
asser
tst
hatphi
l
osophyi
sconcer
nedwi
tht
heor
igi
n,
scope,
ext
entandl
i
mit
sofhumanknowl
edge”
.

Fr
om t
hesedef
ini
ti
ons,weobser
vet
hatphi
l
osophy
i
s compl
ex because i
tisv
iewed f
rom di
ff
erent
per
spect
ives.I
nfact
,one can saf
ely descr
ibe
phi
l
osophyasar
ati
onalexami
nat
ionoft
hemost
basi
c el
ement
s ofourev
erydayexper
ience and
bel
i
ef.Thedi
ff
icul
tyi
ndef
ini
ng phi
l
osophyar
ises
mai
nlyf
rom t
hef
actt
hati
tisanor
mat
ivesci
ence
whi
chmeansi
tispr
escr
ipt
iveand ev
aluat
ive.I
n
ot
herwor
ds,i
tis notl
i
ke t
he sci
ences t
hatar
e
descr
ipt
ivebecausei
tdoesnotst
udyanypar
ti
cul
ar
nat
uralphenomenonasot
herdi
sci
pli
nesdo.The
i
ssueofdef
ini
ti
onshoul
dnotbeapr
obl
em because
phi
l
osophyi
sal
i
ber
alf
iel
dwhi
chenj
oysendl
ess
cont
rov
ersi
es.Phi
l
osophyi
sthemostgener
alofal
l
f
ormsofhumanenqui
ry–i
thasnor
est
ri
cti
onsi
nit
s
subj
ectmat
terunl
i
keev
eryot
herbr
anchofhuman
enqui
ryt
hatl
i
mit
sit
sownscope.

Phi
l
osophyi
sdi
ff
erentf
rom anyki
ndofdi
sci
pli
ne,
whet
heri
nthi
nki
ngorl
i
ving.Phi
l
osophyexcl
udes
not
hing, but i
ncl
udes ev
ery
thi
ng by way of
t
ransf
ormat
iont
osui
ttheconst
it
uti
onoft
hewhol
e,
whi
ch i
sit
s ai
m.To ar
ri
ve at t
his hei
ght of
knowl
edge,i
tconsi
der
sthe cases ofper
cept
ion,
i
nfer
enceandi
ntui
ti
on;obser
vat
ion,i
mpl
i
cat
ion,and
t
het
est
imonyofexper
ience.I
tnei
therdeni
esnor
af
fi
rmsper
empt
ori
l
y.Phi
l
osophyi
sthedi
scov
eryof
t
hemeani
ngbehi
ndl
i
fe;i
tisi
mpar
ti
ali
njudgment
wi
thout pr
ejudi
ce, under
est
imat
ion, or
ov
erest
imat
ion.I
trecogni
zest
hev
aluesaccept
ed
andi
ter
atedi
ndi
ff
erentf
iel
dsofknowl
edgef
rom
obser
vat
ionandl
ogi
cinor
dert
oconst
ructanedi
fi
ce
of essent
ialpur
sui
t.Fr
om t
his,i
tfol
l
ows t
hat
phi
l
osophydoesnott
akesi
desbuthasapl
acef
or
ev
eryst
andpoi
ntoft
hinki
ngi
nit
spr
operper
spect
ive
and f
it
sev
ery
thi
ng i
ntoi
tsbr
oad schemet
othe
ext
entt
hatnot
hingi
signor
edormadet
ost
ri
kea
di
ssonantnot
eint
hehar
monyofi
tsdev
elopment
.
I
ts posi
ti
on i
sthat of t
he chi
ef j
udge i
nthe
gov
ernmentoft
heuni
ver
se.I
tli
stens,under
stands,
si
ft
s,wei
ghsandconsi
der
sthest
atusofanygi
ven
ci
rcumst
ance i
nrel
ati
on t
othe whol
e ofhuman
exi
stence.Noonecan,t
her
efor
eaf
for
dtot
urnaway
f
rom t
hedi
vi
negi
ftcal
l
ed‘
phi
l
osophy
’.
Al
so,phi
l
osophyi
sar
ati
onalenqui
ryi
ntot
hef
orms,
cont
ent
sand i
mpl
i
cat
ionsofexper
ience.I
tisan
at
temptatacompl
eteknowl
edgeofbei
ng i
nal
l
phasesofi
tsmani
fest
ati
oni
nthev
ari
ouspr
ocesses
ofconsci
ousness.The di
scov
eryoft
he ul
ti
mat
e
meani
ng and exi
stencei
sthecent
ralpur
poseof
phi
l
osophy
.Iti
sthe ar
toft
he per
fectl
i
fe,t
he
sci
enceofr
eal
i
ty,t
hef
oundat
ionoft
hepr
act
iceof
r
ight
eousness,
thel
awofat
tai
nmentoff
reedom and
bl
i
ss,andakeyt
othemeani
ngandappr
eci
ati
onof
beaut
y.Phi
l
osophy has i
ts goali
nthe hi
ghest
gener
ali
zat
ionconcei
vabl
e,andt
hisconsi
stsi
nthe
f
inalgr
aspi
ngoft
hedeepestmeani
ngofexi
stence
t
aken as a whol
e.I
n pr
act
ice,phi
l
osophy i
s an
i
ntensel
ypr
act
icalsci
encewhi
chhasi
tsr
oot
sint
he
pr
act
icalneedsofman.Manwant
stoknow about
t
ranscendent
almat
ter
swhenhei
sinar
efl
ect
ive
st
ate.Ther
eisanur
gewi
thi
nhi
mtoknowaboutt
he
secr
etofdeat
h,t
hesecr
etofi
mmor
tal
i
ty,t
henat
ure
oft
hesoul
,thecr
eat
orandt
hewor
ld.Phi
l
osophyi
s
agener
alexposi
ti
onoft
heul
ti
mat
eresor
ttot
hei
r
f
inalcauseswhi
chr
angebey
ondt
her
eachoft
he
senses. Phi
l
osophy concer
ns i
tsel
f wi
th
met
aphy
sicalessences byr
est
ing on t
he st
rong
f
oundat
ionoft
het
est
imonygi
venbysagesondeep
medi
tat
ionandr
eal
i
zat
ion.

Phi
l
osophyi
sar
ati
onalat
temptatl
ooki
ngathuman
exi
stence,and t
he wor
ld asa whol
e.Phi
l
osophy
seekst
ocombi
net
heconcl
usi
onsoft
hev
ari
ous
sci
encesandhumanexi
stencei
ntosomeki
ndof
consi
stentwor
ldv
iew.Phi
l
osopher
swi
sht
oseel
i
fe,
notasasci
ent
ist
,busi
nessper
son,
orar
ti
st,
butwi
th
t
heov
eral
lvi
ewofl
i
feasat
otal
i
ty.C.
D.Br
oadsay
s
“
It
sobj
ecti
stot
akeov
ert
her
esul
tsoft
her
eli
gious
and et
hicalexper
iences ofmanki
nd t
hen r
efl
ect
upont
hewhol
e.Thehopei
sthatbyt
hismeans,we
maybeabl
etor
eachsomegener
alconcl
usi
onsas
t
othenat
ureoft
heuni
ver
seandast
oourposi
ti
on
andpr
ospect
sini
t.
”

Phi
l
osophyi
sthel
ogi
calanal
ysi
sofl
anguageand
t
he cl
ari
fi
cat
ion of t
he meani
ng of wor
ds and
concept
s.I
tpr
esses i
tsi
nqui
ryi
ntot
he deepest
pr
obl
ems of human exi
stence. Some of t
he
phi
l
osophi
calquest
ionsr
aisedi
nthepasthav
ebeen
answer
edi
namannersat
isf
act
oryt
oamaj
ori
tyof
t
hephi
l
osopher
s.Manyquest
ionshav
eonl
ybeen
answer
ed t
ent
ati
vel
y,and manyr
emai
n unsol
ved.
Her
ear
esomeoft
hephi
l
osophi
calquest
ionst
hat
abound.Whati
str
uth? Whati
sthe di
sti
nct
ion
bet
weenr
ightandwr
ong?Whati
sli
fe?Whyam I
her
e?Whyi
sther
eany
thi
ng atal
l
?Isev
ery
thi
ng
r
eal
l
y ev
ery
thi
ng? Whati
s not
hing? Do t
hings
happenbychance?Ori
sther
esomepl
an,pur
pose,
orev
ensomesor
tofi
ntel
l
igenceatt
hehear
tof
t
hings?I
smyl
i
fecont
rol
l
edbyout
sidef
orcesorcan
Idet
ermi
net
hedegr
eeofcont
rol
?Whatdoconcept
s
l
i
ker
ightorj
ust
icemeanandwhatmakesf
oragood
soci
ety
?Theanswer
stoal
loft
hesequest
ionsar
e
pur
elyphi
l
osophi
cal
.

Rel
ati
onshi
pbet
weenPhi
losophyandWor
ldv
iews:
I
deol
ogyandTheor
y

The concept
s“phi
l
osophy
” and “
wor
ldv
iew” ar
e
cl
osel
yrel
ated.I
nit
sbr
oadestsense,aphi
l
osophy
canbedescr
ibedasawor
ldv
iewandwor
ldv
iewcan
al
sor
efert
oone’
sphi
l
osophy
.Wor
ldv
iew orwor
ld
v
iewi
sthef
undament
alor
ient
ati
onorpoi
ntofv
iew,
wor
ldwi
de per
cept
ion orhow one i
nter
pret
sthe
wor
ld.Wor
ldv
iew can i
ncl
ude nat
uralphi
l
osophy
,
exi
stent
ialandnor
mat
ivepost
ulat
esorv
aluesand
et
hics.Wor
ldv
iewi
sref
err
edt
oas“
Wel
tanschaung”
a wor
d whi
ch was coi
ned by Kant
,a Ger
man
phi
l
osopherwhobel
ongedt
otheI
deal
i
sm schoolof
t
hought
. The wor
d denot
es t
he popul
ar and
t
radi
ti
onalv
isi
onoft
hewor
ld;agener
alper
cept
ion
ofr
eal
i
ty,a popul
araccountofor
igi
ns,nat
ure,
exi
stence,l
i
feandt
heuni
ver
se.Ther
ear
edi
ff
erent
t
ypesofwor
ldv
iewsnamel
y:r
eli
gious;
whi
chi
sbel
i
ef
i
nasupr
emebei
ngandsci
ent
if
icwhi
chi
sempi
ri
cal
ormat
eri
ali
sti
cinout
look.Thesev
iewpoi
ntsmakei
t
possi
blef
ormant
ocopewi
thhi
msel
f,env
ironment
and t
hepeopl
ear
ound hi
m.Ther
ear
efi
vebasi
c
way
sinwhi
chphi
l
osophyandwor
ldv
iewscanbe
expl
ained:
1.
Wor
ldv
iew r
epel
s phi
l
osophy-Ki
erkegaar
dis
oneoft
hepr
oponent
soft
hisi
dea.Hebel
i
eves
t
hatan unav
oidabl
etensi
on exi
sts bet
ween
t
heset
woconcept
s.Accor
dingt
ohi
m,i
tmeans
t
hat t
he t
wo t
erms ar
e not exact
ly
i
nter
changeabl
e.

2.
Wor
ldv
iew cr
owns phi
l
osophy – Ri
cker
tand
Wi
ndel
bandsubscr
ibet
othei
deat
hatwor
ldv
iew
i
snotal
i
ent
o phi
l
osophy
.Theyacknowl
edge
t
hatphi
l
osophyi
sthehi
ghermani
fest
ati
onof
t
het
woconcept
s.

3.
Wor
ldv
iew f
lanks phi
l
osophy – t
his model
bel
i
evest
hatPhi
l
osophyandwor
ldv
iewar
etobe
keptsepar
ateandshoul
dnotbeconf
usedwi
th
sci
ent
if
icphi
l
osophy
.MaxWeberandEdmund
Husser
l def
ined t
he sense of t
he t
erms
“
Wel
tanschauung”(
wor
ldv
iew)asusedbysuch
 di
ver
set
hinker
sasNi
col
aiHar
tmannandMar
ti
n
Hei
degger
.

4.
Wor
ldv
iew y
iel
ds phi
l
osophy– t
his modelof
whi
ch Di
l
they i
s a pr
oponent bel
i
eves t
hat
phi
l
osophydoesnotpr
oduceawor
ldv
iew buti
s
pr
oducedby
,andgi
vesexpr
essi
ont
oawor
ldv
iew.
Kar
lManhei
m’sv
iewsonsoci
ologyofknowl
edge
wer
einf
luencedbyt
hismodel
.

5.
Wor
ldv
iew equal
s phi
l
osophyand v
ice v
ersa.
Posi
ti
vi
stsl
i
keGomper
zandMar
xsubscr
ibet
o
t
his i
deol
ogy as wel
l
. Engel
s per
cei
ves
wor
ldv
iewasasy
nony
mforphi
l
osophywhi
chi
s
t
osayoneconceptcanbeusedi
nthepl
aceof
ot
her
.