Philosophy is more rubbish than science by a mile.
The first problem is how they fill their time – writing peer-reviewed papers, spending time researching and going to conferences, teaching undergraduates. What use is it for most people? Greatest philosophical breakthrough of the last 20 years anyone?
The extreme positions have already been plotted. There are no discoveries in philosophy.
While their modus operandi mimics science, they are so scared of the rigor, certainty and force of scientific argument, that they keep themselves hidden, quiet little mice of academia, making sure not to rock the boat and draw attention. Tending to a career.
Worst of all, they come up with words like ontology and epistemology (will write next), they debate the hard problem of something everyone does all the time. They use words which ring-fences unfathomable complexity; minute detail. (Such that surely only a professional philosopher could comprehend, of course.)
Well guess what? Philosophy is a science as much as documentary making or being a novelist.
There is the same difference between academic philosophers and philosophers as between english literature professors and novelists (of course they do sometimes overlap).
The subject matter is philosophy. Books and essays and arguments about abstract, conceptual matters.
Except there are no bastard philosophers to be seen. Plenty of novelists, but no philosophers. They used to exist. But now they don’t. They got swallowed up by the scientific attitude (and the old philosophers didn’t help by being utterly impenetrable).
Here is the definition. Philosophy is creative abstract thought. It is that easy.
Is there a need for philosophy? Doesn’t academic theory of philosophy that university professors do look pretty similar?
The old philosophers failed not in intent or genius but in accessibility. The biggest criticism of the best of them was arrogance and elitism. They created no vehicle for their ideas to get outside of a select few (perhaps they were squashed by religion).
My idea of philosophy is obviously a romantic ideal. Don’t you think its worth aiming for?
Faith, religious and non-religious, cannot defend itself from science (or rather in more confusing and accurate terms, all of a certainty’s defences against science are founded on connected certainties). Philosophy should be the buffer between science and life. Philosophy should be telling science to back off.