Content
of table
Introduction
It is evident that, humanity finds himself
married to an unavoidable nature which he is supposed to master. With this in
mind, man has a yearning spirit for a perfect knowledge of himself and nature
in order to live peacefully with his environment reason why he engages into
philosophical enquiries of all sort but Science has always given serious slaps
on the face of philosophy when placed side by side in an arena because, they
view reality from different angles. Our objective is to demonstrate the value
of philosophy. Philosophy apart from the celebrated etymological definition as
the love of wisdom, in this context can be defined as the process of raising
puzzling questions about reality and attempting to answer them from their
ultimate cause. In a world dominated by science and technology, can we say
that, philosophy is of any value? Considering that as the days go by, the world
is pushing towards a more reflective approach of conflict resolution, we cannot
completely wipe out philosophy from the scene. The value of philosophy has been
limited by some views which of course render it cripple like is the case with
other disciplines. These limitations are explained below. We shall proceed with
a critical analysis. The first part will constitute the limitations of
philosophy, the second part will consist of the importance of philosophy, the
third part will demonstrate the place of philosophy in relation to other
disciplines.
I –
The rejection of the importance of philosophy
This
chapter aims to present the philosophy as an activity rejected by many
considerations. The first element of reject of the philosophy is its abstract character;
the second element is philosophy as a degenerating element of moral standard,
the third is philosophy as a matter of non conformism and fourth the unpleasant
appearance of certain philosophers
.
Philosophy is regarded as a bunch of speculation as a result of its vast
investigative nature in the search of the truth and as such, it is argued to have no place in a world dominated by
science and technology. Some people even call it philosofiction i.e. the love
of fiction and as well see the philosopher as a dreamer since he is in constant
search trying to grasp what he cannot know for sure. Karl Jasper confirms this
when he says that, philosophy is being on the way. For this reason, philosophy
is seen as a secondary task or hobby i.e man must first and foremost satisfy is
basic needs then philosophy can come after since a hungry man is an angry man
and philosophy cannot put food on the table, provide shelter for human beings
nor can it provide cure for diseases like practical sciences and technology
does. Philosophy in this context is seen as an optional object of relaxation
after solving all the basic problems since the African proverb says that, a man
cannot leave his house on fire and go chasing after bush rat. In this light,
philosophy is regarded as valueless.
The vehement refusal of the existence of
God by some philosophers such as Nietzsche who says that God is dead provoke a
fall in societal moral standards since everyone will behave the way he wants,
men will not value each other, the value of material things will be the order
of the day with the rich suppressing the poor, people will be living as if they
are in a jungle and life will become a survival of the fittest as Jean Paul Sartre
thinks. Mankind live in peace and harmony with each other for the fear that,
there is God, and of course minor social problems arise and are resolved
amicably for the fear that, revenge will lead to punishment hereafter. Humanity
is comfortable with this, for the existence of peace in the society. If
philosophy advocate the contrary with the rejection of God’s existence, then
the society feels that, it is of no importance. Moreover, it is a mere
submission to the fallacy of argumentum ad ignorantiam because, if they cannot
reason to the existence of God, instead of accepting the limitation of their
reasoning or their ignorance, they draw the conclusion that God does not exist.
Considering that, philosophy is critical
to every socio economic and political structure, it is regarded as an element
of revolution and does not conform to established principle but rather causes
disorder. We can cite the examples of the ideas of Karl Marx advocating for a
classless society which instigated the citizens and eventually led to the
Russian Revolution and the philosophical ideas of thinkers like Jean Jacque
Rousseau which instigated the French Revolution 1879 that led to the overthrown
of Louis XVI. All these were characterized by riots, destruction of human lives
and properties, the inability of businesses and industries to function properly
etc. this could have been resolved using dialogue and not violence in order to
avoid human and material loses but because of philosophical ideas which were
critical, the people felt cheated and engaged In violence. In this light, if
philosophy is an architect of violence, then it is argued that, it is not
useful to the society.
The History of Ancient western Philosopher
teaches us that, some philosophy predecessors behaved as if they were cut off
from reality. Socrates per say was very shabby in dressing and always lost in
thoughts (what most people will call day dreaming). Thales is said to have
fallen into a pit while observing the sky and Diogenes was walking with lighted
lamps under the guise that, he was looking for man. All these are forefathers
of philosophy who are supposed to be looked up to as role models. This has
pushed some contemporary philosophy teachers to be dressing in cloak of mystery
and appear as masquerades in the name of they want to look like Socrates and
end up scaring people away from the discipline. These attitudes give the impression
that, the philosopher is outdated and has nothing to do with practical life and
has pushed most parents nowadays to promise their children hell if they offer
philosophy as an academic discipline for it has no value.
All the above are attempts mostly by
non-philosophers to put a nail on the coffin of philosophy but the other part
of the work that follows will give some resurrection to philosophy and off
course put some smiles on the face of philosophers as it will be establishing
the importance of philosophy.
5 The
incoherent and stagnant nature of philosophy
Philosophy seems to be marked by
disagreement and lack of progress from birth, this has pushed philosophers to
be turning around the same problem since the ancient period to the contemporary
period without solving them under the guise that questions are more important
in philosophy than answers as karl jasper puts it. This pose a problem because,
other disciplines will ask the question, if every discipline was asking but
questions, who then will solve problems? The incoherence among philosophers can
be seen with Thales who said everything came from water, Anaximander said its
air, and anaximenes said it’s an apeiron just to name a few. These differences
ended up solving no problem. Averroes was quick to discover this mix up amongst
his fellow philosophers in the medieval period then wrote on the incoherence of
the incoherence of the philosophers. With the inability to solve basic
philosophical problems, philosophy jumps into other disciplines and one would
hear appellations such as philosophy of history, philosophy of science,
philosophy of religion. This give an impression to non philosophers that,
philosophy is a jack of all trade but master of none as such, it is looked upon
as a no content discipline.
II-
Importance of philosophy in the whole of life
The aim of this chapter consist of presenting
the capital place or importance of philosophy in the whole of life. This
importance is manifested through firstly, the consideration of philosophy as a
tree in Descartes perspective secondly,
as an instrument used to fight ignorance according to Plato and thirdly, as a
means of liberation and guide of life in
the Njoh Mouelle’s terms and fourthly, as an agent of development in the Towa’s
perspective.
1 – Philosophy as a whole of knowledge and as a tree
according to Aristotle and Descartes
On the epistemological point of view,
philosophy in life is capital for men. To Possess philosophy is like have the
whole of knowledge. It’s in this context according to Descartes that philosophy
can be compared to a tree. Before Descartes, Aristotle thought in the same way.
In the ancient period, philosophy was considered as a science and philosopher
as a skillful scientist. Philosophy was an encyclopedic knowledge, the science
of supreme knowledge and the philosopher an erudite of knowledge. It was above of
all others sciences and the philosopher had a panoramic regard on the whole of
the things. It is in this sense, that, we can understand Aristotle’s assertion
“Le philosophe est celui qui possède la totalité du savoir dans la mesure du
possible” In this perspective, Aristotle regard philosophy as an activity which
contains the whole of knowledge, therefore the person who practices that
activity possesses the knowledge in all measure possible. It’s a person who can
say something in any aspect of life.
According
to Descartes also, philosophy can be represented as a tree where the roots are
metaphysic, the trunk is the physic and the branches are the others sciences
which can be summarized in the medicine, mechanic and morality. In Descartes’ logic,
possession of philosophy is possession of the whole of knowledge which
essentially is metaphysic, physic, morality, medicine and mechanic. In Principe de la
philosophie, the father of cogito asserts that, philosophy can be
considered as: “ Un arbre dont les racines sont la métaphysique, le tronc est
la physique et les branches qui sortent de ce tronc constituent pour
l’essentiel la médecine, la mécanique, et la morale”. In
that context, philosophy is at the same time science of the whole and wisdom. Wisdom in the sense of Descartes is “ La prudence dans
les affaires, la parfait connaissance de tout ca que l’homme peut savoir pour
la conduite de sa vie, pour la conservation de sa santé et l’invention de tous les
arts”. Philosophy therefore, is not only
important, but also necessary and urgent for life. With the knowledge which
comes from philosophy, it is possible to guide life well and to fight ignorance
like Plato think.
2 – Philosophy as instrument to fight ignorance according to
Plato
According to Jean Rostand, “ Philosopher
dans le monde contemporain est une urgence” In his point of view, philosophy in
our world is urgent; mainly in our society under the value crisis. The main origin
of these crises come from ignorance. Plato, since the ancient period, aimed at the
fight against ignorance promoted by sophists. Through the allegory of the cave in Book VII of the Republic, Plato presents our world divided in to two; the sensitive
world and the intelligible world. The sensitive world is characterized by
ignorance, prejudices, illusions and obscurity while the intelligible world is
the world of Ideas characterized with knowledge, science, wisdom, and the light.
The philosopher is the person who leave the cave (which represents the
sensitive world) by ascending dialectic and joins the intelligible in order to
contemplate ideas and acquire knowledge. After the contemplation of the light,
knowledge, he goes down inside the cave and engage the descending dialectic in
order to sensitize, re-awaken his colleagues and share with them the knowledge
acquired in the intelligible world. The allegory of the cave manifest the will
for Plato to fight against ignorance and
prove the fact that philosopher in
society have a mission. That mission according to Plato can be summarized in
three ways:
·
Philosophers should
permanently search knowledge
·
He should share this knowledge to his fellow human being
·
He should participate
in the construction of his society
We
can see with Plato, that philosophy is an instrument to fight ignorance;
philosopher is an educator for the society. It is in this context which was
possible to see Socrates teach his fellow human being in the public place
called “Agora”. Philosophy fights not only against ignorance but also against
fanatics and dogmatism. It
is because it fights against all these problems, that Descartes thinks “C’est
proprement avoir les yeux fermés sans tacher jamais de les ouvrir que de vivre
sans philosopher”. In other words, life without
philosophy doesn’t have sense; because philosophy is a means of liberation and
guide for the human existence.
3 – Philosophy as a means of liberation and guide for human
existence according to Njoh Mouelle
Philosophy is the voices of liberation.
Man must get rid of the chains that maintain him in servitude, anti-reason, and
unintelligence. Ebenezer Njoh Mouelle intends then to indicate the ways that
the lunatic, the mediocre, and the critical man should follow to free themselves
of their animalistic conditions. Philosophy will permit themselves to know the
intellectual and moral ascension that they would leave out of the cave in which
they are jailed by the chains of their ignorance. In that situation one is
fascinated by falsification, inauthenticity, acculturation and depersonalization.
That person is living between African
and western pseudo values. It is a crises for man not knowing in spite of his
studies what can he do and what he is not supposed to do, what he should believe and what he should not believe. He is
afraid to die of witchcraft, the owl that sings in the night, he run to consult
his diviner for some bad dream. Without reflection, he has to ask questions,
change his ways and stop living like a blind in modern time. He equally has to
adopt an important model and make his voice heard to prove that he is above the
others. Unless this is done, he hasn’t broken the chains that maintain him in
ignorance.
*Accession of
liberation
It is the passage from alienation to
liberation that is done by critical elevation only able to replace darkness
with light. It is a transcendental attitude and the creative liberty leading to
well-being and development.
4-Philosophy as an agent of development
Development is the growth, progress, evolution
that is, the passage from a lesser stage to a superior one. In clear terms, development
is the improvement both qualitative, quantitative progress, lasting or even
irreversible of the conditions of life of
individuals and the community. The development takes us back therefore
to economic growth in the technical and scientific realization (roads, bridges,
buildings, food, lodgings energy availability, drinking water, schools,
hospitals…). But to stop there that reduce development whereas one knows with
Njoh Mouelle that, development is not
that a possession of wealth’s because he says: “One can be poor decreased in being
in the middle of numerous materials goods to have must be subordinated it to
the being and no the opposite”
The absence of instruction, of loyalty,
absence of rationality, dynamism, imagination and creativity, don’t favor
development. Philosophy fights against this lacks for a complete development.
III –
Importance of philosophy in relation with others sciences
In order to clarify the importance of
philosophy in relation with others sciences, with others activities of
knowledge or subject matter, this part wiill analyze philosophy in comparison
to science, to religion, to politic and to social science in general.
1 – Importance of philosophy in comparison to science
Sciences as a discipline come from
philosophy because from origin, philosophy
considered itself as science. So
what we call
today sciences were
the branches of
philosophy. It is for
this reason that, ancient
philosophers reflected on the objects
which are the
objects of modern
sciences. For examples: time, motion, reality and so on. That is why Karl
Jaspers in his book
introduction to philosophy:
The Way Of
Wisdom writes: “philosophy
has from its
very beginning look
upon itself as
a science par
excellence”. To achieve
the highest and
most certain knowledge
is the goal
that has always animated
its devotees. Then the contribution of pre-socratics to
modern sciences is considerable. On
mathematics we cannot
forget the famous
theorem of Thales
and on astronomy
we know that
he predicted the eclipse
of the sun.
Anaximander is the
father of the
evolutionists because he
said that in
the beginning man
was born from
animals of other
species. Anaximenes discovered
the theory of condensation and
rarefaction which amount to
modern scientific terminology. Pythagoras
is known as a great mathematician
because of his
famous theorem on
triangle called Pythagoras
theorem. Parmenides established made the difference between reality and appearance. Zeno worked
on notion of motion and
space which are
very important to
modern physics. Empedocles
contributed to the
growth of medicine
proper and we know
also how the
notion of love and
hate were important
to the theory
of psychoanalysis of Sigmund
Freud. Anaxagoras taught
that the sun
is red-hot stone
and the moon is
made of earth.
The atomists showed
that there are
an infinite number
of indivisible units,
which are called
atoms. These atoms
are very important
in modern sciences
especially in chemist
and in biology.
These are the contribution of pre-socratic to the modern sciences. And
for any reason
we cannot say
that philosophy is
useless because it contributed to
all domain of
sciences: mathematics , astronomy
, physics , chemistry ,medicine , psychology , and so on .It
is for this
reason that Karl Popper
writes an articles
titled : Back to the pre-socratic . Plato and Aristotle contributed also too much
to the modern sciences. Plato
showed the importance
of mathematics in
the other sciences
because for him
mathematics was the
model of sciences, and
we know the
importance of mathematics
in modern sciences.
It is the
language of sciences
and any science
cannot pretend to
be objective without
mathematics. Plato also
contributed in astronomy ,
physics ,psychology , biology and so
on .Aristotle is the father
of modern sciences.
The space which today
is object of the study
in the modern
astronomy and physics,
has been studied
by Aristotle . He
showed that, the universe
consists of two
distinct worlds: the
superlunary and sublunary .
In the superlunary
world are stars , which
are imperishable and
undergo no change
other than that of
local motion their
motion being circular
and not rectilinear, as is
the natural movement
of four elements. Aristotle stated
that the earth
is spherical in shape,
it is at
rest in the
centre of the
universe. This is the
geocentric theory in
astronomy which has been replaced by
the heliocentric theory. So these
contribution showthat,
philosophy has contributed
much to modern
sciences. And we can
also say that
sciences never was free from
because many scientists
became philosophers and are still.
It is not possible to do science seriously
without philosophizing.
2- Importance of philosophy in comparison to religion
Philosophy has also brought a great
contribution to religion this contribution
can be idea of God , from the ancient Greek
philosophers , and the
enlightenment of the faith by reason in the
medieval period .
The idea of God which is objet of religion did not have its origin only in
bible but in the ancient Greek
philosophy. For Greek philosophers, God is conceive as cosmic reason or a cosmic
law , or as fate and providence as Karl Jaspers wrote in his book, introduction to philosophy;
the way to wisdom At about 500 B.C .Xemopprome proclaimed. There is only one
God not resembling mortals neither in his aspect nor in his thought. Plato calls
it the Good, the source of all knowledge.
In the medieval period , philosopher were also useful for religion to progress . Philosophy and religion were often oppose
because one is critical thinking and another
was made up of dogma . Philosophy became the servant of the religion and
philosophy has been used to prove the existence of God, to solve the problem of
evil in the world and other Religious issues. Then philosopher contributed much in religion, discarder
has proved the existence of God by the anthological argument and by
the idea of imperfection that man has .Anselm conceived the cosmological argument to provide the
existence of God . in the medieval period
, we know that the work of Plato provoked a great interest to Augustine of hippo and the work
of Aristotle was useful to st
Thomas Aquinas and to
Islamic philosophers like Averroes.
These philosophers used the work of plato and Aristotle to defend the idea of
God and also, an attempt to solve the problem of evil. Therefore we see that
religion needed philosophy to strive and to enlighten people’s faith.
Considering the Cartesian definition of
philosophy which takes the philosophy “as a tree, of which roots are the
metaphysics, the trunk is the physics, and branches which come out of this
trunk are the all other sciences, which reduce itself at three mains, to know
the medicine, the mechanics and the moral”[1],
the philosophy becomes opened to the all other disciplines or domains. Thus, it
is not easy for us to mention its importance and the all domain, but let us begin
with the political domain.
3) Importance of philosophy in comparison to politics.
By definition, politics is an action
leaded or guided by a group of persons who target or aim to conquer the power
and into a state, to direct it and to maintain it. The conquest and the
direction of the power push the politicians to use the all means (lying,
killing…) and strategies without measuring their consequences. It supposes that
there is not ontological axiology and the reasoning in political activities. The
philosophy, thereby, is different from politics and must be the welcome by
political actions.
As a critical, rational, activity and love
of wisdom, the philosopher by these exigencies, must take politics as the
subject matter of reflection so that the word politics conforms itself to the
Aristotelian definition of term of politics as “the sovereign science and at
more high organization point. […], it is the political science. It determines
what are the indispensable sciences in the states, fixes what each citizen must learn and in what measure.”[2] It
means that it is not politics itself which is the bad thing but the politicians behaviours which are posing problems. Thus, the political
philosopher is invited to criticize, to organize, to direct and to manage
rationally the political activities by beginning per its means to conquer then
to the management. Philosophers must integrate the justice and ethical notions
in politics, justice which must be in Aristotelian term “what is just is equal
and belong to everyone”[3] It
is in the same trend of idea that Plato, in front of the political system of
his period thought that “Finally, I understood that all actual states are
mismanaged, because the legislation is early incurable without energic
preparations linked to happy circumstances. I was then brought to glorify the
true philosophy and to proclaim that, at its alone light, one can recognize
where about the justice is into the public live and into the private live.
Therefore, evil will not stop for the humans before the arrival of the race of
the pure and authentic philosophers into power or the chiefs of cities, by
divine grace, they put themselves to philosophize thoroughly.”[4] It
means that in the face of political activity, the philosopher is called to
obligatorily intergrate reason until at the cost of their live as the case of
Socrates presented to us in Apology of
Socrates by Plato. That is why beyond political Sciences, there exist
political philosophy which is considered as an epistemology of political
activities. And it is at this level that we must remind ourselves of the
transformation of certain political systems such as tyranny and the monarchy in
other to establish democracy grace to the activities of reason.
4) Importance of philosophy in comparism to other social
sciences
Philosophy like other social science disciplines,
study man in relationship to the whole.
Social sciences like sociology per say, study man as member of society having a culture.It searchES
to know or discover the different culture without examining them.It is for this
reason that the anthropological approach does not make a difference among
cultures by establishing which is good and which is bad. These social sciences
do not question the cultural practice.
whereas,
philosophy studies man in his dualist reality. philosophy studies man in the
society holistically by considering his
spiritual dimension as well. The instrument used to study the spiritual
dimension in philosophy is the reasoning. However, the social sciences describe
the culture and search to know the spiritual dimension through the culture. Philosophy
questions the reliability of their method of investigation and their results.
And it is these examinations which contributes to build and to ameliorate the
social sciences. Moreover, the social sciences use philosophy in their
hypothesis and interpretation because to
establish a hypothesis and interpret
them is a philosophical activity. That is why beyond the difference which
exists between philosophy and social sciences,philosophy contribute in the
building social sciences. And concerning the social plan, the philosopher poses
the bioethical question in all domains.
Conclusion
According to Plato, a world without philosophy
is like a cave with people who have been tied on one position without the
ability to know anything for real but then are very convinced by poor copies of
real objects which they take for reality. These type of people are very
dangerous to the society. Philosophical knowledge though with its own pitfalls,
helps to wipe out certain societal ills thereby encouraging social integration
amongst people in the society. Philosophy through logic, provide men with a
sense of correct reasoning and sound judgment, through ethics, provide men with
a sense of moral awareness and through politics teach us truly how the society
is supposed to be governed. That’s why Plato said that, either philosopher
become kings or kings become philosophers. With all these, philosophy like any
other discipline has its own limitations then striving towards perfection and
of course, should not be branded as valueless for it humbly contribute in its
own way to the growth of knowledge and by extension, the development of the
society.
Bibliography:
Aristotle, Ethique de Nicomaque, Liv-1,
Garnier- Flammarion, 1965.
René Descartes, principes de la philosophie, Gallimard,
Pléiade, 1985.
Platon, œuvres
complètes, Book VII, Gallimard, La pléiade, 2 vol., 1950.
Descartes, Méditation
métaphysique, Union Général d’Editions, Paris, 1986.
L. Robin, Aristote,
Paris, P.U.F., 1944.
Platon, Apologie de Socrate, Trad. Claude chrétien,
Paris, Hatier, 1993.
Ebenezer Njoh Mouelle, De la médiocrité à l’excellence,
Yaoundé, CLE, 1997.
