Arrogance is such a bad counselor!
For the past few days I have been browsing the Internet, reading stuff here and there, finding out lots of interesting information, getting back to my original philosophical roots (which are far from what the Western Philosophy is expecting from me) and I discovered that people is easily dazzled by any document that claims having a truth revealed. Not long ago I learned that being a Philosopher made me a little arrogant, which is something I own and I'm proud of (there's nothing else I can use to be arrogant!), but is more like a little worm that convinces you of something you're not and really deep inside, at the core, you know for sure: YOU'RE NOT RIGHT!
How come? Well, it's very simple: Philosophy hasn't accomplished its most simple task, that is, to provide a rational explanation of reality. This solely provides the reason why philosophers never reach agreements about anything (or nothing at all!) and keep providing reasons based on other philosophers previous explanations, which have used others before them to do the same, until we end talking about Socrates. Even though Philosophy extends its branches (or tentacles like an evil monster) to include into its domain things such as the mind, knowledge, existence and so forth (read the Wikipedia article -some might already be in pain after reading this as it is not orthodox-). However, Philosophy is nothing but a mere discussion in which each party tries to convince the other that s/he is right and the other is wrong, using a very well and elaborated arguments, not necessarily rational (which explains why some philosophers and thinkers are not regarded as such!). At the end of the discussion the winner stands up triumphant, with a smile in his/her face, leaving the defeated opponent in the verge of a nervous breakdown.
This arrogance is what has convinced so many philosophers of having attained a truth that has never existed, it doesn't exist and it never will, basically because we haven't been able to understand that the Universe does not need explanation nor logic, it just is. While every possible part of reality is susceptible of being dissected by a philosopher using all the tools available, at the end of the day reality bites back (Yes! Reality bites!). In the pursue of knowledge (or happiness, or love, or understanding, whatever is the hottest topic in the academic circles) as philosophers we understand that the arrogance makes us prone to stupidity, because we fail to really understand what the other is saying, yet we are ready to have a comeback for whatever is said.
No true philosopher should try to convince anyone of anything, instead, we should encourage free thinking to help others progress in their pursue of whatever it is they are looking for. Our genetic memory and the genetic code has written for us many things, giving us the sense of belonging to something larger than life, filling the primal void of meaning in our existence with petty explanations that can barely grasp the immeasurable vastness of the Universe and its nonsensical existence. Yet, arrogance comes to play lurking us into misleading people to believe what we believe by using rational arguments, as we feel the truth was revealed to us somehow after years of reading the thoughts of those philosophers who came before us. Philosophy has failed to say something new for the past 2600 years (I'll give some credit to the progress of Ancient Greek Philosophy, as they brought to the light some of this so called 'truths'), what it has done is revealing one of the many facets that make up reality, but that depends solely on the perspective of who's watching, forcing the eyes of whoever is watching in one direction, closing the possibility of finding something new.
How different is this from what Plato described in the allegory of the cave? We have changed our small cave for a bigger one. This one gives us the sense of freedom we crave so badly, because it gives us a false sense of safety. If Philosophy had been able to provide a rational explanation of reality we would be a far more advanced society, living in a dreamworld in which justice, peace and understanding rule. Instead, we see the opposite, as 10,000 years of history shows us that we still act like animals.
I still feel a little uneasy when I'm approached by other philosophers who want to engage in conversations about the perspective of a respected colleague, because I know my point of view will be dismissed after the first couple of sentences, as it will be deemed as naive and not worthy of attention, basically because it was not built using the structure of Western Philosophy and supported by the arguments once provided by famous philosophers. If I don't quote any philosopher in the process I will fail miserably, so it is necessary to find one famous philosopher to be my back up and at least be considered a serious scholar.
As I said, arrogance is such a bad counselor, after all, gloating is the only thing left for a philosopher to do, as he believed he has risen over the rest of us mortals, holding in his hands the secret of the revealed truth, which is nothing but a mere illusion.
How come? Well, it's very simple: Philosophy hasn't accomplished its most simple task, that is, to provide a rational explanation of reality. This solely provides the reason why philosophers never reach agreements about anything (or nothing at all!) and keep providing reasons based on other philosophers previous explanations, which have used others before them to do the same, until we end talking about Socrates. Even though Philosophy extends its branches (or tentacles like an evil monster) to include into its domain things such as the mind, knowledge, existence and so forth (read the Wikipedia article -some might already be in pain after reading this as it is not orthodox-). However, Philosophy is nothing but a mere discussion in which each party tries to convince the other that s/he is right and the other is wrong, using a very well and elaborated arguments, not necessarily rational (which explains why some philosophers and thinkers are not regarded as such!). At the end of the discussion the winner stands up triumphant, with a smile in his/her face, leaving the defeated opponent in the verge of a nervous breakdown.
This arrogance is what has convinced so many philosophers of having attained a truth that has never existed, it doesn't exist and it never will, basically because we haven't been able to understand that the Universe does not need explanation nor logic, it just is. While every possible part of reality is susceptible of being dissected by a philosopher using all the tools available, at the end of the day reality bites back (Yes! Reality bites!). In the pursue of knowledge (or happiness, or love, or understanding, whatever is the hottest topic in the academic circles) as philosophers we understand that the arrogance makes us prone to stupidity, because we fail to really understand what the other is saying, yet we are ready to have a comeback for whatever is said.
No true philosopher should try to convince anyone of anything, instead, we should encourage free thinking to help others progress in their pursue of whatever it is they are looking for. Our genetic memory and the genetic code has written for us many things, giving us the sense of belonging to something larger than life, filling the primal void of meaning in our existence with petty explanations that can barely grasp the immeasurable vastness of the Universe and its nonsensical existence. Yet, arrogance comes to play lurking us into misleading people to believe what we believe by using rational arguments, as we feel the truth was revealed to us somehow after years of reading the thoughts of those philosophers who came before us. Philosophy has failed to say something new for the past 2600 years (I'll give some credit to the progress of Ancient Greek Philosophy, as they brought to the light some of this so called 'truths'), what it has done is revealing one of the many facets that make up reality, but that depends solely on the perspective of who's watching, forcing the eyes of whoever is watching in one direction, closing the possibility of finding something new.
 |
| How pretty is the darkness in which we conciosuly have decided to live? http://realunexplainedmysteries.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/6a0105371bb32c970b01bb0981c4af970d.jpg |
I still feel a little uneasy when I'm approached by other philosophers who want to engage in conversations about the perspective of a respected colleague, because I know my point of view will be dismissed after the first couple of sentences, as it will be deemed as naive and not worthy of attention, basically because it was not built using the structure of Western Philosophy and supported by the arguments once provided by famous philosophers. If I don't quote any philosopher in the process I will fail miserably, so it is necessary to find one famous philosopher to be my back up and at least be considered a serious scholar.
As I said, arrogance is such a bad counselor, after all, gloating is the only thing left for a philosopher to do, as he believed he has risen over the rest of us mortals, holding in his hands the secret of the revealed truth, which is nothing but a mere illusion.
Comments