Content
@
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Gyarados🎩🙈
@gyarados
I’ve had this debate with friends many times: are there conditions that must be met before you call yourself a “philosopher”? Although my undergraduate degree was in philosophy, I don’t think a degree is required. However, I do agree there should be some minimum. Possibly a standard of reasoning or…
2 replies
0 recast
0 reaction
fabián🎩
@fabianx
The philosopher tag is bestowed upon you by others. You're not socially valid as a philosopher until there are enough people who think of you as a philosopher. It's similar with authors or artists, to an extent. That's not the case for a physicist who may be completely unknown but still very much a physicist.
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Gyarados🎩🙈
@gyarados
Yes, I think that’s a good point. It implies some outward communication. And I think it also implies some quality of reasoning. Someone who asserts arguments that are not sound, or at least that are plausible, probably shouldn’t be given the credibility of someone who asserts valid and sounds arguments
2 replies
0 recast
0 reaction
Gyarados🎩🙈
@gyarados
I do think, however, that someone alone on an island could be a philosopher even if there is nobody around to bestow that title upon him I tend to think that philosopher as a title implies some soundness to your reasoning and an active practice of applied reasoning. So more subjective than objective
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
fabián🎩
@fabianx
That definition is closer to the original word's meaning: a φιλόσοφος is someone with an affinity for knowledge. It's funny because the word is already kind of a euphemism ("someone who wants to know" rather than "someone who knows") and yet today people feel iffy about calling themselves philosophers.
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
