Wednesday, July 11, 2012

Philosophy's Thoughtful Ignorance


“I might have got on better with [Cicero’s] philosophical works, but when I saw that he doubted everything, I decided that I knew as much as he did, and that I didn’t need anyone else’s help if I was going to be ignorant,”  (Voltaire, Candide, p. 73). 

These words, spoken by the Venetian nobleman, humorously capture my own feelings on philosophy.  The study of philosophical works, such as Voltaire’s own, is an ironic process to me.  I feel as though I learn nothing from them, yet my mind’s vault of ideas is expanded with each philosophy I consider.  My time spent studying philosophies of men seems to have been wasted yet, at the same time, necessary. 

I am not familiar with the Cicero mentioned in this passage, but I have studied briefly the ideas of another man who seemed as though he “doubted everything.”  In an effort to determine what entities truly exist, Rene Descartes began a thought process by denying the existence of everything unless he could prove it.  His thinking yielded the famous phrase, “I think, therefore I am.” 

As I read Descarte’s essays, I felt as Voltaire’s nobleman feels.  If this man doubts everything around him, is he really any smarter than I? 

Descartes did prove helpful to me for at least one reason.  He led me to identify myself as a pragmatist.  I believe those entities and principles exist which are useful in my current state.  For example, the stove top really exists because when I place my hand on the hot burner, it hurts.  I felt it, and I find it beneficial for me to remove my hand.  Therefore, it exists. 

Take the principle of repentance as a second example.  Repentance is real to me because as I engage in the process, I feel relieved of guilt and filled with peace.  That feeling is real to me.  Repentance is useful, beneficial to my own existence.  Therefore, the principle is real and true.