PHILOSOPHICAL WRITINGS

Introduction

INTRODUCTION

When we come to the study of philosophy, we first need to take into account the purpose of philosophy. Unfortunately some reduce it to being the study of simply what this or that philosopher claimed. This results in students preferring one philosophy over another, without really examining and analyzing the philosophies. This study does not purpose simply to introduce you to different philosophies. It purposes to introduce you to critical thinking skills which will enable you to evaluate critically the different philosophies, even life itself, and hopefully enable you to be able to discover truth.


THE PURPOSE OF PHILOSOPHY

The word philosophy itself comes from a combination of 2 Greek words: philos (love) and sophia (wisdom). In other words, philosophy is the love of wisdom. Not necessarily the love of facts or of knowledge, but the love of wisdom itself. Philosophy ultimately seeks to discover ultimate truth and then discover how to adjust one's life to that truth.

Unfortunately, many people mistake philosophy with sophistry. Sophistry according to Merriam Webster Dictionary is "subtly deceptive reasoning or argumentation." Now the person arguing from this perspective may not even be trying to be deceptive; they just are. Unfortunately, many today don't care about truth; rather, they care about promoting their own ideas regardless of how illogical or inconsistent their ideas are. Such people are merely using philosophy for their own ends. That is so unfortunate because philosophy when used properly can truly be one of the most rewarding fields in all of academia.


WHAT IS ULTIMATE TRUTH?

Ultimate truth or ultimate reality is that which lies behind ALL things, the one thing that is necessary. We are going to assume at least for the moment that you and everything around you are real, that you are not a mere mist or phantom, but instead you are real. You are real, the trees are real, the sun is real, etc. The question then becomes, ˇ§Would life go on if you were not alive? Would life go on if the tree outside your home were not alive?ˇ¨ I think we would all agree that neither I, nor you, nor the tree is ultimately necessary for life in this universe to exist.

What then IS necessary? That one thing (or things or person or persons) is ultimate truth, ultimate reality.


ADJUSTING MY LIFE TO ULTIMATE TRUTH

Earlier I said that we need to adjust our lives to ultimate truth, ultimate reality. Why would I adjust my life to ultimate truth? The reason is that deep within each of us is at least the hope, if not the belief, that ultimate truth, ultimate reality, is good and that if I adjust my life to that ultimate truth, then I will experience a good life, a meaningful and significant life.


PARAMETERS OF THIS STUDY

First, we will stick to logic in determining what is true or false. Take man out of the equation and you will discover that the rest of the universe is extremely logical. In fact I have come to believe that the universe is so logical that the scholars who best understand the physical universe are the mathematicians and the physicists. Well, if the universe is so logical, then it stands to reason that whatever is behind the universe is ultimately logical.

Second, we will not let stand any claim which has not been sufficiently supported. I didnˇ¦t say conclusively supported (which would destroy all claims or beliefs) but rather all claims which are not logically and sufficiently supported. Socrates states: ˇ§An unexamined life is not worth living.ˇ¨ In the same token, an unexamined belief is not worth believing. (I am not encouraging you to quit believing what you believe; rather I am challenging you to examine critically your beliefs. You might just discover that what you believe is logical and can be supported!)

Third, we will reject the notion that life is just a dream. That might just be the right explanation of reality; however, it totally fails to take into account everything around me. It is the negation of all thought.

Fourth, I will stick with the maxim: Ultimate reality is realistic and explains all other expressions of reality.

  1. It only stands to reason that ultimate reality is realistic. What do I mean when I say it is realistic? Have you ever heard the expression, ˇ§Get real!ˇ¨ Well, that is the way I mean to use the word "realistic." Ultimate truth/reality is grounded.

  2. Whereas some beliefs may explain part of life, the truest belief, the ultimate explanation for all of life must explain all of life. Most philosophies explain this or that part of life; however, they fail to account for all of life. (For example, some people claim that the reality of evil and suffering in the world prove that Christianity is not true. We will actually look at evil and suffering this semester. If a system does not account for evil and suffering, then either it is not true or not big enough.) We will try to see what part of life the different philosophies account for. We will see if there is a system which best or perfectly explains all of life. C.S. Lewis claimed: "We believe that the sun is in the sky in mid-day in summer not because we can clearly see the sun (in fact, we cannot) but because we can see everything else" (Miracles, 114). The system which enlightens or accounts for everything in life is truly the sun, that is, ultimate reality.


THE THREE MAJOR MODELS OF ULTIMATE REALITY

The First Model of Reality: Materialism

According to materialism, the material universe is all that exists. There is no God. Man has no soul; rather he is mere matter. There is no such thing as right and wrong; ethics is merely a description of the way people behave. Any system of right and wrong (which would not exist in an absolute sense) would be based upon power: either the strong man, the strong minority, or the strong majority will get their way. There is no life after death.


The Second Model of Reality: Pantheism or Panentheism

The material universe does exist; however, it is not just pure matter. It is divine. You are God; animals are God; everything is God. Or else God dwells in everything. Because a person by nature according to this system is divine and because the universe is basically all that exists, he cannot die; rather, upon the time of death, that person will be reincarnated. Because everybody is divine, it is not necessary to speak about right and wrong because everybody (as divine beings) will always do right. From a certain perspective, everything can be right.

The first major representatives of this second model are the PreSocratics, the Greek philosophers before the time of Socrates. These philosophers were primarily monists, that is, they were trying to discover the one element from which all of life sprang:

PHILOSOPHER ELEMENT
Thales (624-546 BC) Water is the basis of all things
Anaximander (610-546 BC) The Boundless
Anaximenes (585-525 BC) Air
Pythagoras (582-496 BC) Numbers
Heraclitus 535-475 BC) Fire
Empedocles (490-430 BC) The Four Classical Elements, earth, water, air, and fire

On the surface, these PreSocratics appear to be strict materialists; however, as in the case of Heraclitus, a thinking element exists in fire, an element not found in a strictly materialistic system.


The Third Model of Reality: Transcendence

Although the material universe does exist, there is a perfect Being (God) outside the universe. Although this Being has probably made contact with the universe (otherwise how would we know that He existed), He is NOT the universe. At the time of death, we will all die physically; however, upon the time of death, people may actually go to dwell in another place where that divine Being dwells or else one day all people will be resurrected physically from the dead. This system is the only system which allows for absolutes in the area of right and wrong. Many in this sytem believe that this perfect Being has communicated what is right and wrong to mankind.

The first major philosophical treatment of this third model is seen in the works of Socrates and Plato. The PreSocratics were able to account for flux and change in reality; however, their systems didn't really account for absolutes. Whatever else is true about this universe, you don't find absolutes. Everything appears to be in a state of constant flux and change. Not only did Buddha affirm this truth, modern physicists acknowledge it. The Second Law of Thermodynamics claims that the universe is moving towards entropy, that is, the universe is breaking down. Unless sometehing changes, the universe will not only slow down, it will also cool down to being nothing more than just a cold, lifeless collection of rock.

Both Socrates and Plato, though, claimed that absolutes in fact do exist.If they do exist, then they must be derived from another world, the chora. In this realm of perfection exists Beauty, Truth, Virtue, and Goodness (Plato's Forms). Life here on earth is basically made up of shadows of these Forms.

Now as we study the philosophies of different thinkers, we will see which one of these 3 models the philosophers fit into and which of the 3 models is true. After discovering which is true, then we will examine to see if we can discover which version of that model is true.