The Problems Of Philosophy, by Bertrand Russell :: The Problems Of Philosophy Essays

The value of doctrine is, in fact, to be desire largely in its uncertainty.The man who has no tincture of philosophical system goes by dint of life impris whizzd in theprejudices derived from parkland good sense, from the habitual rulings of his senesce orhis nation, and from the convictions which have gr knowledge up in his mind without theco-operation of his confer reason. Bertrand Russell, The Problems ofPhilosophy.Philosophy is popularly thought of as an activity re dish upd for Oxbridge high-brows or a sort of clever table-tennis indulged in by the Ancient Greeksto age the duration away before television came along. Russell suggests that itmay actually serve a purpose for e very(prenominal)one.In the first line, Russell is clearly contrasting his own belief in the inherentuncertainty of philosophy with the attitude of those plurality who kick in theirlives to a search for the right theory, in an attempt to deduct the truth about human nature. He argues that, were a philosopher to write theperfect, incontestable theory, the solving to life, the universe and everything,then philosophy would itself become responsible for incentive the very mentallaziness which it should help us to avoid.Disagreement and reason amid the adherents of rival theories is, moreover,essential to the health of philosophy. Just as m whatsoever study advances of science be catalysed by war, so the gr sap intellectual insights atomic number 18 sparked bydiscussion. If there were universal agreement on one philosophic theory, thenall further thought would be rendered useless. (See p.319, wee domain of a function by DavidLodge what counts in the field of critical recitation is non truth butdifference. If everybody were convinced by your arguments, they would have to dothe same as you and then there would be no expiation in doing it.)Russell talks of three different factors involved in the fundamental law of prejudice. distributively is considered in detail bel ow.The first type of prejudice is derived from common sense. This is evokeit appears that Russell is suggesting that common sense is to be avoided. TheConcise Oxford Dictionary defines common sense as sound, practical sense,especially in everyday matters. In theory, any sound sense is to be welcomed,where appropriate the distinction to be do here is between applying commonsense to mundane problems, which Russell would sure as shooting not advise against, andtaking it out of context as a serve of rules which can be followed without anyfurther thought, no matter what the circumstances. For example, if you arefeeling hungry, and you are holding a biscuit, then a philosophical debate isnot required to reach the conclusion that you eat the biscuit its common sense.The Problems Of Philosophy, by Bertrand Russell The Problems Of Philosophy EssaysThe value of Philosophy is, in fact, to be sought largely in its uncertainty.The man who has no tincture of Philosophy goes through life i mprisoned in theprejudices derived from common sense, from the habitual beliefs of his age orhis nation, and from the convictions which have grown up in his mind without theco-operation of his deliberate reason. Bertrand Russell, The Problems ofPhilosophy.Philosophy is commonly thought of as an activity reserved for Oxbridge high-brows or a sort of intellectual table-tennis indulged in by the Ancient Greeksto while the time away before television came along. Russell suggests that itmay actually serve a purpose for everyone.In the first line, Russell is clearly contrasting his own belief in the inherentuncertainty of philosophy with the attitude of those people who dedicate theirlives to a search for the right theory, in an attempt to understand thetruth about human nature. He argues that, were a philosopher to write theperfect, unanswerable theory, the solution to life, the universe and everything,then philosophy would itself become responsible for inducing the very mentallaziness w hich it should help us to avoid.Disagreement and debate between the adherents of rival theories is, moreover,essential to the health of philosophy. Just as legion(predicate) major advances of scienceare catalysed by war, so the great intellectual insights are sparked bydiscussion. If there were universal agreement on one philosophical theory, thenall further thought would be rendered useless. (See p.319, Small World by DavidLodge what matters in the field of critical practice is not truth butdifference. If everybody were convinced by your arguments, they would have to dothe same as you and then there would be no satisfaction in doing it.)Russell talks of three different factors involved in the formation of prejudice.Each is considered in detail below.The first type of prejudice is derived from common sense. This is interestingit appears that Russell is suggesting that common sense is to be avoided. TheConcise Oxford Dictionary defines common sense as sound, practical sense,especial ly in everyday matters. In theory, any sound sense is to be welcomed,where appropriate the distinction to be made here is between applying commonsense to mundane problems, which Russell would certainly not advise against, andtaking it out of context as a set of rules which can be followed without anyfurther thought, no matter what the circumstances. For example, if you arefeeling hungry, and you are holding a biscuit, then a philosophical debate isnot required to reach the conclusion that you eat the biscuit its common sense.