What is Philosophy?

So, what is philosophy?

Looking at the simple definition of this word, we see Lover of Truth.  Obviously, there is more to this.  A dictionary definition might have these words:

1.  the rational investigation of the truths and principles of being, knowledge, or conduct.

2. a particular system of thought based on such study or investigation: the philosophy of Spinoza.

3. a system of principles for guidance in practical affairs.

Thus, we can see that the pursuit of this study includes the guiding us in how we come to know what we know, its usage, and understanding the why’s of application.

We analyze our presuppositions, beliefs, theories, why and how we believe what we believe.  To pursue the studies one simply needs an inquiring mind.  Going further, the study of philosophy opens up a broader path: Loving the study of wisdom..

Oddly, the Ancient Greeks believed that the ignorant man cannot be truly happy.  Ignorance simply means not knowing, for whatever reason.  Hardly a genuine insult, one can be ignorant of a subject that is not studied, why would the Medical Doctor study astronomy?

One ancient writer commented that ‘the unexamined life was not of high value.’  One needs to examine personal belief structure as well.

How do we really know, or know anything?  What is knowledge, and how can certainty be assured?

How does one explain God, evil, and the battle of these that we see on earth?

Two definitions will be provided, for these terms will be seen again.

Metaphysics –

1. the branch of philosophy that treats of first principles, includes ontology and cosmology, and is intimately connected with epistemology.

2. the underlying theoretical principles of a subject or field of inquiry.

3. a treatise by Aristotle, dealing with first principles, the relation of universals to particulars, and the teleological doctrine of causation.

Epistemology –

a branch of philosophy that investigates the origin, nature, methods, and limits of human knowledge.   May include the study of truth.

The exploration of these two terms will allow one’s own personal philosophy to be built.  The term “own philosophy” refers to the values that make one unique.  The personal value system has points that are open to debate and questioning, and those that are not.

Sadly, when one sees these terms, they are usually used to justify attacks against Christian values and truths.  Usually “metaphysics” is used the most.  By simple definition, noted above, the use is somewhat unjustified. If one does not wish to believe anything that is of the Christian faith, one need not bend logic to do so.  Adding to this, when Aristotle explains in general terms what he tries to do in his philosophical works, he says he is looking for "first principles," a first principle is one that cannot be deduced from any other.  Stated another way, a statement that is more of a postulate, taken on faith, not able to be proved by known methods of reason, science, testing, anything.  Thus, the search for first principles is not peculiar to philosophy; philosophy shares this aim with biological, meteorological, and historical inquiries, among others. But Aristotle's references to first principles in this opening passage of the Physics and at the start of other philosophical inquiries imply that it is a primary task of philosophy.

(From, Aristotle's First Principles.)

Or, perhaps the one challenging a belief structure and using the term “metaphysics” is critiquing “the underlying principles.” In this case, one should have a firm understanding of their own belief system, working within the studies, writings, and records.  Looking at this differently, studying the “why’s” of the belief system – “knowing why you believe what you believe.”

The defense against such inquiries (attacks?) is a thorough understanding of the belief system, and some the principles, logic patterns, tactics and techniques that can be used.

Logic, careful arguments, deductive and inductive reasoning, as well the use of inferring conclusions.  Many beliefs have strong logical basis, some beliefs and values are supported by inferring. 

The basis of Christian theology is not the focus here, but understanding the need for these ideas, and tools shall be emphasized.  How to use ontology and cosmology for defense of the faith, both from hostile inquiries within the faith, and outside of the faith.

Ontology, study of the nature of being, becoming, existence, or reality, as well as the basic categories of being and their relations. Additionally, ontology deals with questions concerning what entities exist or can be said to exist, and how such entities can be grouped, related within a hierarchy, and subdivided according to similarities and differences.

Cosmology is the study of the origin, evolution, and eventual fate of the universe. Religious cosmology (or mythological cosmology) is a body of beliefs based on the historical, mythological, religious, and esoteric literature and traditions of creation and eschatology.  With is broad definition, the application to Christian beliefs should be seen, no doubt by removing the extraneous verbiage.  

Historical is the written history, from the Bible and Church history.  Mythological is academic speak for that which cannot be explained by known human terms. Religious explains itself. Esoteric is holding ideas preserved or understood by a small group as opposed to the population at large.

Looking at Philosophy

What is philosophy? Simply defined it is the love of truth. Some use it to also mean the study of truth. But what is truth? How do we define truth? Can we simply say, “Truth is what I believe.”

To take it an extreme one would then conclude that the lit candle will never burn the cloth, since it is what is believed. Given the few seconds needed, obviously the statement is false. Belief can also be stated as something based on a series of facts. To the one seeking truth, building a series of statements to prove something is called “an argument.”

It is important to avoid mixing a logical argument, whose sole purpose is to prove or disprove something with the one who is not exercising good judgment.  This proceeds to annoy those around because of unkind statements that do little to support the point of this, screed or tirade.

We take the time to align facts a way that supports what we believe in, for example the candle:

The candle is a small fire

Fire can reach high temperatures

Cotton burns at a lower temperature than the candle flame

Cotton must be exposed to the flame for a minimum of five seconds to catch on fire

Therefore, the piece of cotton cloth will burn when exposed to the candle for five seconds.

No amount of faith or belief will change these facts. (Okay, there may be a slight variation in the times, but the argument stands.) The argumentative person might attack the person for not believing what just happened, while the disbeliever may claim the test was rigged. These last two are examples of how not to prove what you believe in. From what can be seen above, logic is a big part of philosophy. One is certainly free to hold certain beliefs that cannot be supported by logic or a solid argument.

Often, the challenge is in areas where there is insufficient evidence to make a solid decision, yet one must be made. How to make the decision?

Philosophy is not:

·         A way to argue with those you do not agree with citing values and ideas from “Ancient Wisdom”

·         A way to get out of doing assigned tasks

·         A system of tools to learn new methods of disrespectful behavior

·         A way to attack someone of different faith or religion

·         A method of ruthlessly disagreeing with someone else

There are those who will remain hostile to the Christian faith; who will do so very politely.  There are those who will wear this hostility openly and unkindly.  Courtesy will have us to refrain from engaging in fruitless ventures. 

The Apostle Paul reasoned with those in the Greek mindset who would argue politely and properly.  These can be called intellectual giants, for they will consider what is being said.  Matters of faith ultimately reside in the heart, with the barriers often being very strong.  The word of God is a powerful tool, sharper and stronger than a two-edged sword, used properly can only strengthen the kingdom. 

But the argument needs two crucial parts, the first is facts, the next covered with philosophical principles is tactics and techniques.  The Bible is the most accurate piece of ancient literature on planet Earth.  The alignment of facts to support this position is part of the argument.  Having the facts to organize is another.

Fact #1:     Over 24,000 manuscript parts, pieces, and whole manuscripts of  the New Testament

Fact #2:     Of these over 9,000 are complete manuscripts of the NT

Fact #3:     The writings are 99% identical, minor changes (spellings) do not affect

                   doctrinal principles nor historical facts

Fact #4:      The writings of Homer account for less than 4,000 manuscripts and pieces

Fact #5:      Less than 25 years from the original to oldest manuscripts, Homer is over 100 years

(The Old Testament has a different set of details including method of copying, details, first person accounts, languages)

Conclusion:         The most accurate piece of ancient literature on planet earth is the Bible.

There is easily more than this, but the idea is simple, organize the facts, present them with a strong conclusion.

A valid conclusion is one that can be drawn from the facts presented.  A truthful conclusion would flow from accurate facts presented.  Sadly, if in an argument the one or more facts presented are not correct, the valid conclusion may indeed be wrong – false.  Here we see the valid  conclusion that lacks veracity.

#1:          Cats have ears

#2:          Cats make a barking sound

#3:          Cats have toes on their feet

#4:          Cats eat meat

#5:          Carnivores eat meat

Conclusion:         Carnivores are cats that bark, have toes, and eat meat.

#2 is obviously wrong, altering the conclusion, valid but lacking veracity.

Deductive reasoning leads from a general to a specific idea or conclusion.

Itching happens in the evening

Itching happens after eating dinner

Itching happens after eating vegetables

By eliminating vegetables and adding them one by one itching happens after eating carrots

Itching is caused by carrots

Inductive reasoning seems to the opposite direction, from the specific to the general.  Some simple examples:

·         Jill and Bob are friends. Jill likes to dance, cook and write. Bob likes to dance and cook. Therefore it can be assumed he also likes to write.

·         All students that have been taught by Mrs. Smith are right handed. So, Mrs. Smith assumes that all students are right handed.

·         All observed children like to play with Legos. All children, therefore, enjoy playing with Legos.

Another tactic is use Inference, or to infer.  Simply, the act of passing from one proposition, statement, or judgment considered as true to another whose truth is believed to follow from that of the former; or a conclusion or opinion that is formed because of known facts or evidence.

Please note: NOT the same as deductive or inductive reasoning because:  Here one fact may NOT lead directly to another.  In fact the same terms are usually NOT used form premise to premise.

For example: The program uses records of past purchases to make inferences about what customers will buy in the future.

Assembling known facts, one may be able to use deductive or inductive reasoning. If some speculation is involved, we move to inferring.  The inferred conclusion is usually not as strong as the prior methods, but is usually equally as strong, and perhaps is the only viable method of reaching a conclusion.

Christians and Philosophy

What is the Christian to do when confronted by someone who has ideas that run contrary to orthodox Christianity? Put together pieces of information and hope for the best? Why not simply tell the person that the Bible says they are wrong and walk away? Perhaps denounce the position with little information, and hope for the best? Perhaps one would call this person a "sinner" too blind to see the real "truth," and offer to pray for them? There are many responses possible. How about someone has just read the works of Zeno and is enthralled by the presentation of facts in support of Monism, vs Plurality. Could you discuss this with the person and perhaps open their eyes to what the bible has to day about the issue? Could you respond to a non - Trinitarian Christian? Could you explain why the Christian believes what s/he does in a systematic logical fashion? After all, the Apostle Paul did.

From a simple perspective, how does one communicate beliefs and values?  To personalize this, “Do you know why you believe what you believe?” Can it be explained in a simple yet effective way? Is it easily understood? Do you really know what you are saying? 

Looking at this differently, the person just encountered has strange belief.  Clearly it is not a biblical idea, but how will you share anything that contradicts this idea with strength, conviction and most importantly organized facts?  Do you know what is being said, and why it is wrong?  How will you find out more?

If unsure, simply listen and let God guide you.  There may be times when silence is the best option.  It is rare indeed when something unusual does not come up again.  What kind of questions will you ask?  Believe it or not, many of these tools and techniques for discovering truth are found in the Bible, and because of God’s sovereignty, He has allowed non-biblically based individuals to “discover” the many of these same tactics.  Truth is very valuable indeed. 

Asking good questions is a tool or tactic used by the ancient Greeks.  We look for students of today to ask good questions as well.  We know this as the “Interrogation Method.” Plato made frequent use of this to find truth.  Do we know enough about Natural Revelation to explain some things of the Bible?  Are some ideas inferred from what we know what is in the Bible?

Some truths need to be explained, because a lie is easy very easy to spread.  What looks “right” and easy to explain may not be truly correct, and in fact pretty bad.  Truth may take longer to explain, but in the end, makes more sense.  Sadly there are those who do not wish to believe anything contrary to their own personal belief, and may need to left to their own choices.  That is the value of freedom of choice, God gives us this right which some abuse.

So, can you explain why you believe what you believe?  Can you use many sources to explain these beliefs?  Does history support some or all of what you believe?  Can you find some value in the opposing position?

These last questions will have answers that vary based on the situation encountered.  Philosophy, especially the tools of argumentation will help in this.