Philosophers just keep on asking questions. Philosophy is about questioning, not answers. Philosophers never give solid answers. Philosophy is just a theoretical exercise with no real-world application. Right?
Wrong!
Philosophy may seem fruitless compared to more "results-based" disciplines. Philosophy may seem "airy" compared to things which give people money-tokens for doing it. But this is only because the task of the philosopher is the largest and hardest to quantify. With the theologian, the buck stops at God. With the scientist the buck stops at empirical evidence. With the politician, the buck stops at how well they can twist reality. But with the philosopher the stakes are larger and the buck stops nowhere - truth is by far the greatest category of them all. Philosophy has to wrestle not only with its problems but also with itself - what is the buck?
Just because philosophers have the greatest scope - the field of 'truth' is a big-un - that does not mean all they do is raise questions. Hegel thought he solved philosophy, predicting the inevitable end of history. Wittgenstein thought he had language all wrapped up, until he saw a Neopolitan insult someone with a hand-gesture. Leibniz had it all worked out with his monads (those tiny little soul-things), and Spinoza wrote a book about...well, everything, including the most ethical way to live. Prolific Plato wrote about every aspect of human existence, and wanted his own City-State ruled by philosopher-kings. Countless philosophers have tried their best to find truth and to influence the world with their ideas (and we might all hope, they will continue to do so into the future).
But for all its greatness, philosophy does not have the megalithic influence of a political institution - it cannot mindwash poorly educated citizens with rhetoric, or mass religion - it cannot make legions of superstitious people worship fetish-idols, or science - it cannot define itself supreme and laugh down any other form of looking at the world (insert Richard Dawkins reference here). But if philosophy could do these things, that would make it an authority, and philosophy should be an exercise against authority.
Philosophy should not triumph by its 'weight', or because people have mysticized it. Philosophy should not triumph by making people feel stupid, or inferior to its thinkers. Philosophy should triumph because people freely accept the conclusions that philosophers come to for themselves. Or, more productively, because people add to and improve existing ideas and find the methods of the philosophers the most inviting.
What is the use of it all? Philosophy is the great 'stepping back', challenging assumptions. That is one place philosophy will always be relevant - it can monitor other fields: history, science, politics, everything, revealing the assumptions and refining the goals of these disciplines.
But as a pure discipline philosophy is even more powerful. The quest for Truth is irresistible and valid beyond measure, and can transform humanity. Can you imagine post-war civilization, when all of Man adheres to a reasonable, flexible, ever-expanding method of deciding who is right and who is wrong? It is a quest too important not to undertake.
Philosophers do not all agree, and are definitely not saying the same thing. But maybe by the very pursuit of truth they are all in a kind of tacit agreement. In short, their means may be different, but their ends all the same: opening up minds to enlightenment through their intellectual contest; undertaking this epic quest which no one else truly can.
Selim Talat
