# Is philosophy really worth studying? **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [January 9, 2017, 1:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-philosophy-really-worth-studying/776696 "2017-01-09T01:32:13Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![igor\_frankensteen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/839c29/32.png) [@igor\_frankensteen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/igor_frankensteen)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2017, 1:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-philosophy-really-worth-studying/776696/101 "2017-01-14T01:51:38Z")
One thing is clear already: there is a direct, inverse correlation between how much actual knowledge and education in philosophy a commentator has, and how dismissive or derisive the are of it. The people who have made the most egregiously ignorant statements in opposition, have had the least actual training in it. It is very much like studying History (my area of primary education), in that when all you get is a cartoonish general taste of it, and then you are tested by a teacher, it’s common to develop a child-like resentment of it, and think it is useless make-work. It is only after you have a fairly thorough understanding of it, that you can start to recognize that it is directly affecting every aspect of your life all the time, and that when you DO understand it, you come to be much more in control of your end of things. I have no doubt, that the naysayers here wont even begin to change their opinion, no matter how correct and detailed the rest of us are, because it is one of those many subject areas of human life, that you flat out CAN’T comprehend, unless you get enough of the “pieces of the puzzle” to be able to begin to see how everything else fits together. ``` I understand. Because I have been through having to deal with subjects that I also thought were total crap, and that I derided in exactly the same ways ("no one asked me how to take a square root before I could get a job delivering appliances!" or "I've never had to diagram a sentence even ONCE since leaving high school!") . But I have also eventually learned much more about the subjects, especially including HOW THEY MATTER to everything else, and have been much better off because of it. ``` One of my favorite posts in this thread so far, is the person who patiently pointed out to the person who claimed not to have a personal philosophy, that actually he very much DID have such. It is the essence of real Philosophy, to declare that you have none. And to take that point the next step, it is in part by STUDYING philosophy as a subject, that you can DISCOVER what your own philosophy actually is, what parts of other peoples’ philosophies (AKA belief systems) you have accidentally grafter crudely into your approach to life, so that you can finally take full control and responsibility for all of your life. One big application: our elections. Those who have both a thorough grounding in History, and in Philosophy as disciplines, were easily able to see through the manipulations, the lies, and especially the counter-lies that our gaggle of politicians succeeded in foisting on the country. ---
**Author:** ![Mijin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mijin/32/9369_2.png) [@Mijin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mijin)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2017, 3:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-philosophy-really-worth-studying/776696/102 "2017-01-14T03:17:39Z")
> [@igor\_frankensteen](#): > > One thing is clear already: there is a direct, inverse correlation between how much actual knowledge and education in philosophy a commentator has, and how dismissive or derisive the are of it. It’s worse than that even, because there is also a correlation between people being very dismissive of philosophy, and people trying to push a (flawed) philosophical proposition. We’ve seen a flavor of it in this thread. It’s interesting that this happens, since I don’t think anyone would consciously have the thought: “My proposition doesn’t stand up to scrutiny, therefore I must dismiss the very concept of scrutiny”. But it’s common nonetheless. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2017, 3:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-philosophy-really-worth-studying/776696/103 "2017-01-14T03:19:25Z")
A couple of reactions to past comments … > [@GunnarFranz](#): > > … You can only have superficial meaning without Philosophy. … The capital P makes me think this goes too far. Philosophy is _a_ path but far from the only path and your deeper may be goofiness to another. > [@Mijin](#): > > … And, at this time, solipsism is worse than any of the claims above. As I tried to explain upthread, it has _negative_ explanatory power. > Not only can it not be used to make any predictions about the future, but the existing useful models we have of reality, that do make correct predictions (e.g. you will yell in pain if I kick you, because you are a living, conscious entity like me), suddenly “just happened” to have made correct predictions for no particular reason. First response is a yup. If my experiences are all that is “real” then my experiences are still most predicted by a model that behaves as if the rest of the world exists, and that utilizes that aspect of the mind that humans seem to be particular good at: having a theory of the minds of other. In that sense solipsism adds no value or even subtracts some and behaving as if others did not exist, treating them on the assumption that they are imaginary, would result in bad outcomes for me. But. The concept still has value. It is a recognition that what we actually have is experiences, _presumptively_ of some world, that we _assume_ reflects a reality, but that our _experience might be lying_ about that reality. Sure it is an extreme expression of that point: the lie might be that _there is no reality_ and only my individual experience exists, and that extreme case, as above, adds no value. But recognizing that our experienced reality may be lying to us, questioning the assumption that what we experience actually is, was in fact important. Questioning that assumption allows us to understand that _a host_ of perceptual and cognitive illusions occur and that our minds are in fact making up a large portion of what we experience as reality every day; it allows us to accept that we are wired to perceive the world in certain ways but at different levels of analysis (the very small and the very big) the world does not work the way we can perceive, and thus we need to develop models and other tools to predict it. > [@Trinopus](#): > > … a third option, which, in technical language, goes “Meh.” … Sure … impress us all with the high flalootin’ technical jargon! 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2017, 6:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-philosophy-really-worth-studying/776696/104 "2017-01-14T06:07:35Z")
> [@igor\_frankensteen](#): > > . . . I understand. Because I have been through having to deal with subjects that I also thought were total crap, and that I derided in exactly the same ways (“no one asked me how to take a square root before I could get a job delivering appliances!” or “I’ve never had to diagram a sentence even ONCE since leaving high school!”) . But I have also eventually learned much more about the subjects, especially including HOW THEY MATTER to everything else, and have been much better off because of it. . . . You often find people who express their ignorance in terms of pride. “I don’t know anything about cosmology, and I’m a better person for it.” I have relatives who say, “Science is only for eggheads; real people don’t pay attention to that stuff.” I’m terribly ignorant about a hell of a lot of things – but at least I ain’t proud of it! > [@](#): > > And to take that point the next step, it is in part by STUDYING philosophy as a subject, that you can DISCOVER what your own philosophy actually is, what parts of other peoples’ philosophies (AKA belief systems) you have accidentally grafter crudely into your approach to life, so that you can finally take full control and responsibility for all of your life. . . . This! Even if nothing else, it’s nifty to have a name (or just a label) for your beliefs. I’ve come to learn I’m a “Negative Utilitarian with a Penalty Function,” which is, basically, I want to reduce the amount of pain in the world…but not by the absurd and childish approach of killing all living things. (Well, there wouldn’t be any more pain, right?) ---
**Author:** ![WordMan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/e8c25b/32.png) [@WordMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WordMan)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2017, 12:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-philosophy-really-worth-studying/776696/105 "2017-01-14T12:34:30Z")
> [@Mijin](#): > > It’s interesting that this happens, since I don’t think anyone would consciously have the thought: “My proposition doesn’t stand up to scrutiny, therefore I must dismiss the very concept of scrutiny”. But it’s common nonetheless. Exactly. Philosophy is a set of Tools for Thinking. If you don’t like what is being produced, I would point to operator issues, not the tools. Note: _All_ lines of inquiry - scientific, philosophical and spiritual - run into (currently or forever) unexplainable phenomena and paradox. Quantum entanglement? Dark Matter? The definition of Consciousness? All twist our brains. So? Philosophy has evolved. Before the word Scientist was coined, the role was referred to as Natural Philosophers. Now Science is seen as a separate bucket, and Philsophy is seen as a Framing of the Big Questions. What’s fascinating: the two still feed each other. As we learn more about the Reality around us, it informs how we can and should ask the Big Questions. As we think about how to ask the Big Questions, it influences how we dig around scientifically. It’s all good. Right now, as social networks, Big Data, and new approaches to AI are front and center, it seems as though we are considering some of the Big Questions differently than we ever have before, which is leading to new lines of questioning, etc. So it goes - in a good way. So, back to the OP: just stop. Be humble and accept that if you are getting tangled up in your tools, perhaps it’s because you don’t know how to use them. Trying to pick fights over the usefulness of a toolset is silly and immature, especially if you actively demonstrate you aren’t trying to listen, just to get everyone to agree that the tools suck. They don’t suck - they’re just _tools_. ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2017, 10:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-philosophy-really-worth-studying/776696/106 "2017-01-14T22:21:39Z")
> [@WordMan](#): > > . . . Trying to pick fights over the usefulness of a toolset is silly and immature . . . That said, some day I’m gonna find that Phillips guy and wring his neck… 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Thudlow\_Boink](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thudlow_boink/32/320_2.png) [@Thudlow\_Boink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Thudlow_Boink)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2017, 11:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-philosophy-really-worth-studying/776696/107 "2017-01-14T23:34:41Z")
> [@Trinopus](#): > > That said, some day I’m gonna find that Phillips guy and wring his neck… 😉 Are you saying he screwed up? ---
**Author:** ![panache45](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/panache45/32/64_2.png) [@panache45](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/panache45)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2017, 11:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-philosophy-really-worth-studying/776696/108 "2017-01-14T23:38:54Z")
> [@WordMan](#): > > Before the word Scientist was coined, the role was referred to as Natural Philosophers. Now Science is seen as a separate bucket, and Philsophy is seen as a Framing of the Big Questions. I’d say that science can be defined as “applied reasoning,” which is a subset of epistemology, one of the main branches of philosophy. ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2017, 2:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-philosophy-really-worth-studying/776696/109 "2017-01-15T02:50:05Z")
> [@Thudlow\_Boink](#): > > Are you saying he screwed up? Totally torques me off, the darn chiseler. (Take this job and shovel it…) ---
**Author:** ![Machinaforce](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/aeb1de/32.png) [@Machinaforce](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Machinaforce)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2017, 4:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-philosophy-really-worth-studying/776696/110 "2017-01-15T04:19:09Z")
> [@GunnarFranz](#): > > Ignorance is bliss. You can only have superficial meaning without Philosophy. 2400 years later the unexamined life is still not worth living. It’s more like the examined life isn’t worth living. Unlike those who choose ignorance phioopshers are more likely to be suicidal. They can’t even solve the problem of suicide. You say you only have superficial meaning without it but that is false. It’s actually quite deep especially when you don’t try to pick everything apart only to find nothing underneath. ---
**Author:** ![Urbanredneck](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ea5d25/32.png) [@Urbanredneck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Urbanredneck)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2017, 4:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-philosophy-really-worth-studying/776696/111 "2017-01-15T04:22:43Z")
Without reading all the previous posts, I say yes, Because when it comes down to it everything we do is around the question of “why?” and that normally is a philosophy. Now I’m not sure I can break that down into something Plato or Nietzsche says but we do things for a purpose. ---
**Author:** ![Machinaforce](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/aeb1de/32.png) [@Machinaforce](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Machinaforce)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2017, 4:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-philosophy-really-worth-studying/776696/112 "2017-01-15T04:23:20Z")
> [@WordMan](#): > > This is why I rarely post to your threads. If you don’t like philosophy, walk away. > > An examined life is only worth living if you gain self-awareness and wisdom through the process. If you are using the same philosophy tools to stress out and chase your tail, then perhaps they aren’t for you. You cannot gain self awareness through philopshy because the self doesn’t exist. Plus introspection is shown to be very flawed. You also don’t gain any wisdom because you cannot know anything. ---
**Author:** ![Machinaforce](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/aeb1de/32.png) [@Machinaforce](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Machinaforce)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2017, 4:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-philosophy-really-worth-studying/776696/113 "2017-01-15T04:28:23Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > Ah, see I can accept your _observations_ of your experience as likely truths: you experienced yourself having become … well befuddled (reading and repeating without thinking and having that even feeling like “overthinking”, and feeling like there is no point to learning how to improve cognitive skills, etc.) … from when you studied philosophy on … but the speculative _hypotheses for the causes_ of those experiences? Nah. If anything you have less reliable to say about that than others do … being as cognitively and emotionally impaired now as you describe yourself to be. > > What we know is that you report events that correlated with each other. You thought you could think just fine. You went to college. During your college time you studied (on your own, apparently) some philosophy. During that time you experienced a cognitive and emotional crisis that you have never recovered from. Yes, you as the subject experiencing this regrettable and sad ongoing cognitive and emotional crisis, blame the philosophy you were self-studying at the time. The hypothesis perhaps can be stated as “The study of philosophy causes people to have lasting cognitive and emotional decompensation and dysfunction.” But that hypothesis is clearly falsified by many others here and elsewhere who have studied philosophy with no harmful and some positive effects. Your report of depressed students who have studied philosophy is so discordant with what the rest of us self-observe that it is dismissed as either selection bias or the delusions of someone who is, by self-report, cognitively and emotionally broken. > > OTOH the other hypotheses suggested are not so fr falsified, including; “philosophy just happened to be there to blame when (s)he experience a college-aged cognitive and emotional crisis from which he/she has never really recovered.” Having self-studied it during that time is consistent with that possibility. Again the others suggest are also still in the running: you were always broken and did not realize it until you began to slef-study philosophy and the challenge was too much for you and broke _your_ brain specifically. > > My condolences to you for your current state and my best wishes for a recovery. Once again you are incorrect. As I have said, philosophy is what broke my mind. Prior to reading it I was fine. Also you cannot write off that philosophy can cause destruction for people just because that’s not what happened to you or others here. It doesn’t make the claim false. ---
**Author:** ![Machinaforce](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/aeb1de/32.png) [@Machinaforce](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Machinaforce)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2017, 4:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-philosophy-really-worth-studying/776696/114 "2017-01-15T04:32:52Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > **Trigger Warning: > The following post contains critical thinking and rational analysis. Readers who have experienced exposure to such thinking and analysis as traumatic should read aware of that fact. In case such persons decide to read this post and experience revictimization MPSIMS is available as a safe space. Thank you.** > > Stylistic note: in order to avoid the awkwardness of attempting to write in a gender-neutral manner, and to make the post less cumbersome **Machinaforce** will be referenced as one gender (coin flip this time comes up “female”) and referred to as “M”. > > Let’s approach what we know and do not know rationally and consider several propositions and their implications. > > **M** presents herself as described above: a person who while in college studied philosophy on her own and from then on has been intellectually and emotionally impaired; she believes harmed by the experience of that study. > Now IF we observed **M** to be presenting coherent rational arguments in this thread then **M** would be actually not cognitively stunted by way of the exposure to philosophy and we would have to consider two possible alternatives: > > 1. **M** was knowingly presenting a false story in order to provoke discussions and gain attention. That, if the case, would be trolling, which impermissible in this forum to explicitly consider as a possibility. > > 2. She merely perceives herself to have been cognitively disabled by the experience, sort of similar to hysterical paralysis. > > Given that someone who is not cognitively harmed should be able to be aware of that state, the latter is improbable, and the former is impermissible to consider. > Fortunately we do not need to consider either possibility as the posts made here are consistent with the state **M** claims. But note: treating **M** ’s posts as if they are made by someone not so impaired would, logically, be by way of action making an accusation of trolling so should be done with great caution. So for further discussion we must provisionally accept as true the claim that **M** experienced a cognitive and emotional crisis during college around the time that she self-studied philosophy to some degree and has never recovered. > Given that we can proceed. > > Proposition one: the study of philosophy may harm one’s brain and induce both dysphoria and cognitive impairments. Certainly we have solid evidence that such is not true in the general case as there have been generations of college students who have taken on such studies to various degrees and had no such impairments result. ( **M** ’s absurd observations of so many depressed as a result clearly consistent with the veracity of her claimed impairments.) But possibly in some vulnerable individuals such study done without guidance is potentially of harm and **M** ’s self-described sad circumstance is the result of that? If so then the best way to avoid that is to have more have such exposure with the safety of professional support during the initial exposures, in classroom settings and relatively early on. > > Proposition two: **M** ’s brain was broken before ever being exposed to the attempted self-study of philosophy (inclusive of critical thinking, analysis, and self-awareness) but she did not know enough to be aware of her state. Exposure to it actually repaired some of her brain’s cognitive dysfunctions and as a result she became aware, for the first time, of how much she did not know, the knowledge of which has been emotionally overwhelming for her. This is the most hopeful case as the cure for that is more study so that she can join the many others who are able to accept that there is so much that we all do not know, and much that we think we know that we are wrong about, and who are consequently forever engaged in attempts to reduce their individual and our collective ignorance, by way of rational analysis and critical intellectual thought. > > Proposition three: True true unrelated. She experienced her cognitive and emotional decompensation and happened to be self-studying philosophy at the time, so it was convenient to blame. > > Proposition four: Reverse causation. She began to experience her cognitive and emotional crisis for some reason and that triggered a desire to search for solutions and looked to self-study of philosophy as part of that attempt to deal with the crisis in progress. It did not however prevent the progression of her crisis. > Teeming Millions - which proposition seems least improbable and/or are there others to consider? Wrong on all counts. Philosophy cannot reduce your ignorance because it clearly states that you cannot know anything. Also thenphilpsohy they teach in college isn’t the kind that causes mental breakdowns or suicide (aka nihilism and solipsism). They avoid such subjects to prevent harm from coming to the students. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2017, 4:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-philosophy-really-worth-studying/776696/115 "2017-01-15T04:41:56Z")
> [@Machinaforce](#): > > Once again you are incorrect. As I have said, philosophy is what broke my mind. Prior to reading it I was fine. > > Also you cannot write off that philosophy can cause destruction for people just because that’s not what happened to you or others here. It doesn’t make the claim false. I can see how you would had condemned Socrates to drink hemlock. It is clear that you have missed a lot of what Philosophy can teach us, you may need a crash course. [QUOTE] First, we’ll really try to understand. You’re not going to agree with all of the ideas that I present to you – and I won’t agree with them either! That’s not the point. The point, in step one, is to really try to get inside of an idea – to understand it as charitably as possible. Then, in step two, you’ll subject your understanding to some serious critical evaluation – basically, you’ll try to knock down what you think you know about a particular view of the world. And you’ll do this whether you agree with the view or not. Why? Because: Only when you challenge your understanding of how some people view the world, can you decide for yourself if theirs is a view worth having. Which leads me to my final point: Philosophy is not your usual field of study. I’m not going to be teaching you a body of knowledge where success means you know a bunch of stuff. Success, in this course, will mean that you know how to think. All we have are questions. And all you have is a brain. And the goal of philosophy is for you to use your brain to come up with the answers that make the most sense to you. You’ll learn how to formulate arguments to support your ideas, so you can explain why you think you’re right. Which, if you’ve ever been on the Internet, you know is something that not a lot of people are good at. In order to do that, you’re going to need to understand philosophical reasoning – the tools we use to investigate life’s most perplexing questions! And that is where we’re gonna be headed the next time we meet. [/QUOTE] ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2017, 4:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-philosophy-really-worth-studying/776696/116 "2017-01-15T04:50:06Z")
Oh, and more to the point, as you have noticed most of the people here do not agree with you, so perhaps you need to take this item into consideration: > [@](#): > > And no matter how much you disagree with someone about God or Obama or Chris Hemsworth, you can at least grant that they are not beasts. > > Because, most of the time at least, people can be persuaded. By arguments. > > You use arguments all the time – in the comments, at family dinners, with your friends – you probably just don’t think of them the same way that philosophers do. > > When you try and convince your parents to loan you the car, or when you’re talking up Crash Course to your friends, you are using arguments. Thanks, by the way. 😃 > Each time you tell someone to do or believe something – or when you’re explaining why you do or believe something – you are giving an argument. > > The problem is, the vast majority of people aren’t really good at arguments. We tend to confuse making a good argument with, like, having witty comebacks, or just making your points more loudly and angrily, instead of building a case on a solid foundation of logic. Which can be harder than it sounds. > > But learning about arguments and strong reasoning will not only make you a better philosopher, it will also set you up to be a more persuasive person. Someone who people will listen to. > > Someone who’s convincing. > > So, yeah, these skills are beneficial no matter what you want to do with your life. So you might as well know how to argue properly. ---
**Author:** ![Machinaforce](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/aeb1de/32.png) [@Machinaforce](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Machinaforce)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2017, 5:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-philosophy-really-worth-studying/776696/117 "2017-01-15T05:33:20Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > A couple of reactions to past comments … > The capital P makes me think this goes too far. Philosophy is _a_ path but far from the only path and your deeper may be goofiness to another. > First response is a yup. If my experiences are all that is “real” then my experiences are still most predicted by a model that behaves as if the rest of the world exists, and that utilizes that aspect of the mind that humans seem to be particular good at: having a theory of the minds of other. In that sense solipsism adds no value or even subtracts some and behaving as if others did not exist, treating them on the assumption that they are imaginary, would result in bad outcomes for me. > > But. The concept still has value. > > It is a recognition that what we actually have is experiences, _presumptively_ of some world, that we _assume_ reflects a reality, but that our _experience might be lying_ about that reality. Sure it is an extreme expression of that point: the lie might be that _there is no reality_ and only my individual experience exists, and that extreme case, as above, adds no value. But recognizing that our experienced reality may be lying to us, questioning the assumption that what we experience actually is, was in fact important. Questioning that assumption allows us to understand that _a host_ of perceptual and cognitive illusions occur and that our minds are in fact making up a large portion of what we experience as reality every day; it allows us to accept that we are wired to perceive the world in certain ways but at different levels of analysis (the very small and the very big) the world does not work the way we can perceive, and thus we need to develop models and other tools to predict it. > > Sure … impress us all with the high flalootin’ technical jargon! 🙂 I didn’t need philosophy to tell me that my senses can be fool and the like, that’s what I learned from science. But what you don’t understand a that things like solipsism are a void that you don’t get out of if you fall into them. ---
**Author:** ![Machinaforce](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/aeb1de/32.png) [@Machinaforce](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Machinaforce)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2017, 5:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-philosophy-really-worth-studying/776696/118 "2017-01-15T05:36:08Z")
[quote=“GIGObuster, post:115, topic:776696”] I can see how you would had condemned Socrates to drink hemlock. It is clear that you have missed a lot of what Philosophy can teach us, you may need a crash course. [/QUOTE] You may have missed what I said before about it being thinking that goes nowhere like a treadmill. ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2017, 5:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-philosophy-really-worth-studying/776696/119 "2017-01-15T05:40:36Z")
> [@Machinaforce](#): > > . . . They can’t even solve the problem of suicide. . . . They can’t, but you can. You can reason intelligently, given the facts, until you decide for yourself whether suicide is right or wrong. Philosophy gives you advanced tools for thinking clearly, on this and many other subjects. Would you build a cabinet without saws, chisels, or sandpaper? Then why would you try to conduct moral reasoning without a knowledge of philosophy? > [@Machinaforce](#): > > You cannot gain self awareness through philopshy because the self doesn’t exist. Plus introspection is shown to be very flawed. You also don’t gain any wisdom because you cannot know anything. Cite that “the self doesn’t exist.” And one can attain wisdom without “knowing anything.” Knowing that you don’t know anything is the first of the great steps toward wisdom. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2017, 6:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-philosophy-really-worth-studying/776696/120 "2017-01-15T06:27:23Z")
> [@Machinaforce](#): > > You may have missed what I said before about it being thinking that goes nowhere like a treadmill. You missed post #116 [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-philosophy-really-worth-studying/776696.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-philosophy-really-worth-studying/776696.md?page=7)