Wisdom Lovers United (or untied)

[VonNoble]

As I have shared, I returned to college last semester.  Not so much that I need to pick up 

another degree - more because I enjoy learning.   The younger generation there have some 

definite things to teach me (in addition to how to use my smart phone that does more things

than I imagined a phone would ever do.) 

 

This semester - I decided to add a general 100 level philosophy course to my schedule.  I have 

NEVER had a single philosophy class in any of my formal schooling.  I have not read much about

it.  It is COMPLETELY new to me. 

 

I sat through the VERY long (time wise as no one expects a FULL lecture day one) first

introductory overview.  The professor is young, enthused and a very good speaker.    The way they

will teach this course (peer review, group learning IN CLASS) etc. is very new to me and I enjoy

learning a new way to learn.  All good. 

 

At the end of the class - the professor made an impassioned argument FOR PHILOSOPHY.

 

Among the highlights were the results of lots of studies that indicate philosophy majors score

better on graduate entrance exams (which seemed only relevant to me if one wanted to take a 

grad school entrance exam)  (I got the major point that logic learned would be helpful but the ONLY

example was grad school which probably lacked appeal to many in the room)....also that

LONG AGO philosophy was the spring board of what we now know as OTHER sciences.

 

Philosophy lead to the evolution into mathematics, physics and such. 

 

NOW TO THE QUESTION milling around in my brain. 

 

According to this introductory lesson - apparently I am quite remiss in never having studied 

philosophy till now.  

 

Either we ALL should be learning it in kindergarten to have had "better" lives.

OR.....the world would be a better place by now if we had been trained to use these tools before we

entered the workforce.  OR......

 

Philosophers really irk the rest of the world  and don't produce much that we need as all of the philosophers in

history didn't feed or raise funds for much of anything (I gleaned that due to the vibrant defense of an attack

never made by anyone in class so it must be residual defensiveness from years of being attacked by others

accusing philosophy majors of not contributing anything but ideas. )    

 

So......should we start teaching philosophy in grade school?    Would we be a better world if everyone

used these thinking tools in society?   I have no clue - that is why I am taking the class. 

 

von

[Key]

3 hours ago, VonNoble said:

As I have shared, I returned to college last semester.  Not so much that I need to pick up 

another degree - more because I enjoy learning.   The younger generation there have some 

definite things to teach me (in addition to how to use my smart phone that does more things

than I imagined a phone would ever do.) 

 

This semester - I decided to add a general 100 level philosophy course to my schedule.  I have 

NEVER had a single philosophy class in any of my formal schooling.  I have not read much about

it.  It is COMPLETELY new to me. 

 

I sat through the VERY long (time wise as no one expects a FULL lecture day one) first

introductory overview.  The professor is young, enthused and a very good speaker.    The way they

will teach this course (peer review, group learning IN CLASS) etc. is very new to me and I enjoy

learning a new way to learn.  All good. 

 

At the end of the class - the professor made an impassioned argument FOR PHILOSOPHY.

 

Among the highlights were the results of lots of studies that indicate philosophy majors score

better on graduate entrance exams (which seemed only relevant to me if one wanted to take a 

grad school entrance exam)  (I got the major point that logic learned would be helpful but the ONLY

example was grad school which probably lacked appeal to many in the room)....also that

LONG AGO philosophy was the spring board of what we now know as OTHER sciences.

 

Philosophy lead to the evolution into mathematics, physics and such. 

 

NOW TO THE QUESTION milling around in my brain. 

 

According to this introductory lesson - apparently I am quite remiss in never having studied 

philosophy till now.  

 

Either we ALL should be learning it in kindergarten to have had "better" lives.

OR.....the world would be a better place by now if we had been trained to use these tools before we

entered the workforce.  OR......

 

Philosophers really irk the rest of the world  and don't produce much that we need as all of the philosophers in

history didn't feed or raise funds for much of anything (I gleaned that due to the vibrant defense of an attack

never made by anyone in class so it must be residual defensiveness from years of being attacked by others

accusing philosophy majors of not contributing anything but ideas. )    

 

So......should we start teaching philosophy in grade school?    Would we be a better world if everyone

used these thinking tools in society?   I have no clue - that is why I am taking the class. 

 

von

Yeah, philosophers get paid rather handsomely. 

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

4 hours ago, VonNoble said:

As I have shared, I returned to college last semester.  Not so much that I need to pick up 

another degree - more because I enjoy learning.   The younger generation there have some 

definite things to teach me (in addition to how to use my smart phone that does more things

than I imagined a phone would ever do.) 

 

This semester - I decided to add a general 100 level philosophy course to my schedule.  I have 

NEVER had a single philosophy class in any of my formal schooling.  I have not read much about

it.  It is COMPLETELY new to me. 

 

I sat through the VERY long (time wise as no one expects a FULL lecture day one) first

introductory overview.  The professor is young, enthused and a very good speaker.    The way they

will teach this course (peer review, group learning IN CLASS) etc. is very new to me and I enjoy

learning a new way to learn.  All good. 

 

At the end of the class - the professor made an impassioned argument FOR PHILOSOPHY.

 

Among the highlights were the results of lots of studies that indicate philosophy majors score

better on graduate entrance exams (which seemed only relevant to me if one wanted to take a 

grad school entrance exam)  (I got the major point that logic learned would be helpful but the ONLY

example was grad school which probably lacked appeal to many in the room)....also that

LONG AGO philosophy was the spring board of what we now know as OTHER sciences.

 

Philosophy lead to the evolution into mathematics, physics and such. 

 

NOW TO THE QUESTION milling around in my brain. 

 

According to this introductory lesson - apparently I am quite remiss in never having studied 

philosophy till now.  

 

Either we ALL should be learning it in kindergarten to have had "better" lives.

OR.....the world would be a better place by now if we had been trained to use these tools before we

entered the workforce.  OR......

 

Philosophers really irk the rest of the world  and don't produce much that we need as all of the philosophers in

history didn't feed or raise funds for much of anything (I gleaned that due to the vibrant defense of an attack

never made by anyone in class so it must be residual defensiveness from years of being attacked by others

accusing philosophy majors of not contributing anything but ideas. )    

 

So......should we start teaching philosophy in grade school?    Would we be a better world if everyone

used these thinking tools in society?   I have no clue - that is why I am taking the class. 

 

von

 

 

Perhaps you should take the class first -- then -- if you find any value in it -- then you can raise those questions.

 

I would like to point out that all the books and videos you could possibly want on the subject; are available at the public library.

 

I am persuaded --  that the primary function of Philosophy --  is to provide employment to the teachers of philosophy.

 

 

 

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

1 hour ago, Key said:

Yeah, philosophers get paid rather handsomely. 

 

 

What's the difference between a philosopher and a large pizza?  A large pizza can feed a family of four.       

[VonNoble]

15 hours ago, Key said:

Yeah, philosophers get paid rather handsomely. 

 

I am assuming that means they do not?

After that impassioned speech....I found myself imprinting that this is NOT something 

society at large values.   Then again, I have often run into people who DID take this in

college (as a general humanities class) that found it to be worthwhile.   They majored in

something else - but would bring up the topic at the oddest times in business. 

 

Did you take Philosophy?

 

von

[VonNoble]

14 hours ago, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

 

 

Perhaps you should take the class first -- then -- if you find any value in it -- then you can raise those questions.

 

I would like to point out that all the books and videos you could possibly want on the subject; are available at the public library.

 

I am persuaded --  that the primary function of Philosophy --  is to provide employment to the teachers of philosophy.

 

 

 

 

I never really had a reason to take Philosophy till now.   It never was a priority for anything I was doing.

 

 I intentionally have refrained from reading anything about the topic before class.   

 

I did go to the bookstore and check out the general titles of books there.  

It seemed it might be prudent to see which direction this class wants to use to introduce the topic.

There was much in the title search that sort of made me conclude this  may be a crusade in search

of a cause.  But I am going to wait before finalizing any conclusions. 

 

The concept of peer teaching (in light of my last semester class where peers didn't show up much of the time)

sort of intrigues me to see how this can possibly work. 

 

I am curious from those who ever took this class (or had this for a major) - was it helpful?  I remember the 

time I took a class on Beowulf...the teacher insisted any civilized gentleman should have a passing 

understanding of such things.   It never came up once in my life. 

 

I also took a basic course in music appreciation (never used it) ....art appreciation (never used it) and

Urban Studies (that also never helped me with a single decision at work.)     I am sort of guessing this

might fall into that realm.

 

Then again - there were lots of books on those shelves that were new releases.    And more than one had 

hit the best seller list in the not too distant past so maybe there is something to this.   

 

Often those who have been there before you can help you to understand (at the outset) things that might

be particularly useful to pay attention to (and things that are endured but not all that helpful in practical

application)....knowing there are lots of educated folks on this Forum - some general feedback seemed 

like a good thing to invite. 

 

BTW, thanks for the chuckle regarding the pizza. 

 

von

 

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

47 minutes ago, VonNoble said:

 

I never really had a reason to take Philosophy till now.   It never was a priority for anything I was doing.

 

 I intentionally have refrained from reading anything about the topic before class.   

 

I did go to the bookstore and check out the general titles of books there.  

It seemed it might be prudent to see which direction this class wants to use to introduce the topic.

There was much in the title search that sort of made me conclude this  may be a crusade in search

of a cause.  But I am going to wait before finalizing any conclusions. 

 

The concept of peer teaching (in light of my last semester class where peers didn't show up much of the time)

sort of intrigues me to see how this can possibly work. 

 

I am curious from those who ever took this class (or had this for a major) - was it helpful?  I remember the 

time I took a class on Beowulf...the teacher insisted any civilized gentleman should have a passing 

understanding of such things.   It never came up once in my life. 

 

I also took a basic course in music appreciation (never used it) ....art appreciation (never used it) and

Urban Studies (that also never helped me with a single decision at work.)     I am sort of guessing this

might fall into that realm.

 

Then again - there were lots of books on those shelves that were new releases.    And more than one had 

hit the best seller list in the not too distant past so maybe there is something to this.   

 

Often those who have been there before you can help you to understand (at the outset) things that might

be particularly useful to pay attention to (and things that are endured but not all that helpful in practical

application)....knowing there are lots of educated folks on this Forum - some general feedback seemed 

like a good thing to invite. 

 

BTW, thanks for the chuckle regarding the pizza. 

 

von

 

 

 

I took a few basic philosophy classes.  They come in handy for a quote now and then.  Nothing I would call useful.  None of it ever helped me with problem solving -- unless Buddhism can be classified as philosophy.  I did enjoy Bertrand Russell.  

[Key]

On 1/20/2018 at 4:31 AM, VonNoble said:

 

I am assuming that means they do not?

After that impassioned speech....I found myself imprinting that this is NOT something 

society at large values.   Then again, I have often run into people who DID take this in

college (as a general humanities class) that found it to be worthwhile.   They majored in

something else - but would bring up the topic at the oddest times in business. 

 

Did you take Philosophy?

 

von

No, but what little I did learn of a few did arouse my curiosity on the subject. There have been some interesting philosophers in history. Descartes for one, and obviously, Socrates was another.

It seems philosophers were better regarded in the past than are current ones now, true, in my view, as well.

[mererdog]

16 minutes ago, Key said:

it seems philosophers were better regarded in the past than are current ones now, true, in my view, as well.

We rarely make them drink poison nowadays....

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

1 hour ago, mererdog said:

We rarely make them drink poison nowadays....

 

Nowadays, we don't care enough to make them drink poison.  It does not mean that they are better regarded.

 

 

 

Edited January 21, 2018 by Jonathan H. B. Lobl

[Dianna]

Introductory philosophy was a nice over-view, but the main takeaway is to realize that, not only are there other sides to a point of view, but some of those other points of view can be just as well thought out and have as much evidence for their argument.

 

You can listen to one side and hear the different philosophers and empiric evidence, and nod and think, I can agree with that, then hear out the other side with other philosophers and their reasoning and find yourself thinking, I can agree with some of that too. To me, philosophy is a chance to challenge what you think you already know. It's about being open-minded enough to really listen to other ways of looking at things. 

 

If you can stick it out past the names and dates and memorizing for tests, the deeper you go, the more interesting it can become. Not in general, but when you find a subject or subjects of interest, such as religion, social issues, education etc. where you can learn different, sometimes nearly opposite historical schools of thought and how they evolved and affect what we have today.

,

I think some philosophical way of thinking should be introduced in school curriculum, not with lists of philosophers but in fun activities leading to discussions of good citizenship and personal integrity. The public school system knows well that if you teach a child how to think they will likely follow that pattern of thought as they get older. Unfortunately, they do not want children to overly question what might be in the revisionist history books or a teacher's point of view.

 

This past year I've seen a lot of riots in big cities, supposedly for free speech and people wanting to be heard, yet shutting down other people's points of view and right to express themselves. Imo, this is what can happen when you have a generation of kids who have grown up being protected from "bad" or "other" thoughts and always praised that they were right and infallible -- we see people who can not even actively listen to well reasoned out other points of view they don't think they can ever agree with, without needing to seek out some "safe space" to protect them from "trigger words".  It's not just the youth, it's  also the adult world lately. We see this in politics, which has become so concrete and inflexible, Democrats and Republicans can't even agree when they agree, bipartisan has become a bad thing. Because the general media loathe the president, they can not ever allow themselves to report on anything positive. We live in an era where we have access to so much information, yet seem to becoming more closed minded. 

 

The bigger picture of philosophy is starting with what you think you know, be willing to learn other points of view, be able to defend what you believe against widening arguments, and quite probably, finding your own understanding has broadened. When all the dust settles from those old philosophy books, it boils down to being able to know what you believe, be able to effectively argue your case, and an ability to listen and respond to other points of view, which is the exact opposite of what is going on in schools, politics and media today, so in my opinion, I think philosophy would be useful for children to learn, just as they did in other societies throughout history.

[VonNoble]

20 hours ago, Key said:

No, but what little I did learn of a few did arouse my curiosity on the subject. There have been some interesting philosophers in history. Descartes for one, and obviously, Socrates was another.

It seems philosophers were better regarded in the past than are current ones now, true, in my view, as well.

Thank you.... I will be attentive whoever I finally learn about Descartes.     

von

[VonNoble]

On 1/20/2018 at 6:41 AM, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

 

 

I took a few basic philosophy classes.  They come in handy for a quote now and then.  Nothing I would call useful.  None of it ever helped me with problem solving -- unless Buddhism can be classified as philosophy.  I did enjoy Bertrand Russell.  

Funny that name.... Bertrand Russell came up in my theater class (but I cannot remember why).... i’ll have to check my notes.   Knowing nothing formally on this topic - I often referred to the wisdom of Buddhism as a philosophy.... I guess I’ll know better in four months if that is Philosophy, philosophy.... or neither one of those options.   Thanks for the input. 

von

[VonNoble]

6 hours ago, Dianna said:

 

If you can stick it out past the names and dates and memorizing for tests, the deeper you go, the more interesting it can become. Not in general, but when you find a subject or subjects of interest, such as religion, social issues, education etc. where you can learn different, sometimes nearly opposite historical schools of thought and how they evolved and affect what we have today.

I found your entire explanation exceedingly helpful.   Thank you very, very much.   Especially re:it getting better past names and dates (which has been a chore this far).    Your summation gives me a more hopeful and positive approach to learning potentially a comfortable additional tool for understanding....

 

Bravo!

von 

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

24 minutes ago, VonNoble said:

Funny that name.... Bertrand Russell came up in my theater class (but I cannot remember why).... i’ll have to check my notes.   Knowing nothing formally on this topic - I often referred to the wisdom of Buddhism as a philosophy.... I guess I’ll know better in four months if that is Philosophy, philosophy.... or neither one of those options.   Thanks for the input. 

von

 

The focus of Bertrand Russel is clear thinking.  It's no accident that he was a "notorious Agnostic".  

[Key]

7 hours ago, VonNoble said:

Thank you.... I will be attentive whoever I finally learn about Descartes.     

von

Descartes' most famous quote is, "I think, therefore, I am." So wherever you think, there you are.  (I kid on the wherever part.)

[Key]

14 hours ago, Dianna said:

Introductory philosophy was a nice over-view, but the main takeaway is to realize that, not only are there other sides to a point of view, but some of those other points of view can be just as well thought out and have as much evidence for their argument.

 

You can listen to one side and hear the different philosophers and empiric evidence, and nod and think, I can agree with that, then hear out the other side with other philosophers and their reasoning and find yourself thinking, I can agree with some of that too. To me, philosophy is a chance to challenge what you think you already know. It's about being open-minded enough to really listen to other ways of looking at things. 

 

If you can stick it out past the names and dates and memorizing for tests, the deeper you go, the more interesting it can become. Not in general, but when you find a subject or subjects of interest, such as religion, social issues, education etc. where you can learn different, sometimes nearly opposite historical schools of thought and how they evolved and affect what we have today.

,

I think some philosophical way of thinking should be introduced in school curriculum, not with lists of philosophers but in fun activities leading to discussions of good citizenship and personal integrity. The public school system knows well that if you teach a child how to think they will likely follow that pattern of thought as they get older. Unfortunately, they do not want children to overly question what might be in the revisionist history books or a teacher's point of view.

 

This past year I've seen a lot of riots in big cities, supposedly for free speech and people wanting to be heard, yet shutting down other people's points of view and right to express themselves. Imo, this is what can happen when you have a generation of kids who have grown up being protected from "bad" or "other" thoughts and always praised that they were right and infallible -- we see people who can not even actively listen to well reasoned out other points of view they don't think they can ever agree with, without needing to seek out some "safe space" to protect them from "trigger words".  It's not just the youth, it's  also the adult world lately. We see this in politics, which has become so concrete and inflexible, Democrats and Republicans can't even agree when they agree, bipartisan has become a bad thing. Because the general media loathe the president, they can not ever allow themselves to report on anything positive. We live in an era where we have access to so much information, yet seem to becoming more closed minded. 

 

The bigger picture of philosophy is starting with what you think you know, be willing to learn other points of view, be able to defend what you believe against widening arguments, and quite probably, finding your own understanding has broadened. When all the dust settles from those old philosophy books, it boils down to being able to know what you believe, be able to effectively argue your case, and an ability to listen and respond to other points of view, which is the exact opposite of what is going on in schools, politics and media today, so in my opinion, I think philosophy would be useful for children to learn, just as they did in other societies throughout history.

They still touch on the subject, albeit lightly, in my stepsons middle school history class while they were studying the renaissance period.

Community college also covers a bit in a course on critical thinking.

So, while the topic is exposed, it doesn't really seem to be enough for students to gain interest in really delving into it a little more thoroughly.

[mark 45]

On 1/20/2018 at 8:41 AM, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

 

 

I took a few basic philosophy classes.  They come in handy for a quote now and then.  Nothing I would call useful.  None of it ever helped me with problem solving -- unless Buddhism can be classified as philosophy.  I did enjoy Bertrand Russell.  

why can't buddhism be classified as philosophy?it isn't a religion,per say.and yes i know that certain schools of buddhism can be considered so,but that is a conversation for another time.

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

1 hour ago, mark 45 said:

why can't buddhism be classified as philosophy?it isn't a religion,per say.and yes i know that certain schools of buddhism can be considered so,but that is a conversation for another time.

 

Buddhism is also a practice, much like meditation.  It's what we want it to be.  I have found some of the Buddhist ideas helpful.  I am not a Buddhist.  

1 hour ago, mark 45 said:

 

 

[VonNoble]

On 1/22/2018 at 2:51 PM, Key said:

They still touch on the subject, albeit lightly, in my stepsons middle school history class while they were studying the renaissance period.

Community college also covers a bit in a course on critical thinking.

So, while the topic is exposed, it doesn't really seem to be enough for students to gain interest in really delving into it a little more thoroughly.

After seeing your post (thanks) - I started checking around.  You are correct.   In addition to what you mentioned it appears a watered down version of "logic in conflict resolution" is part of a peer conflict resolution training in some middle schools.   Interesting that some sorts of philosophical tools are finding their way into use before high school even. 

von