Philosophy of Heartbreak

•January 19, 2010 • 3 Comments

Throughout history, the field of philosophy seems to have been practiced mostly by men.  These men have had some… choice things to say about women.

Aristotle, for instance, thought that women had fewer teeth than men. I’ve always assumed that this was because Mrs. Aristotle happened to have fewer teeth than he did.

Schopenhauer, famous for his chauvinism, said that, “The weakness of their reasoning faculty also explains why women show more sympathy for the unfortunate than men; …and why, on the contrary, they are inferior to men as regards justice, and less honourable and conscientious.”

Nietzsche, influenced by Schopenhauer (though maybe not on this matter) said: “Ah, women.  They make the highs higher and the lows more frequent,” and, my personal favorite, “Everything about woman is a riddle, and everything about woman has a single solution: that is, pregnancy.”

It is my contention that these men are really just bitter because they had bad luck with women.  When your heart is broken or you are not sexually satisfied, it’s easier to blame the whole lot than to blame yourself. This isn’t particularly fair, but sometimes blanket statements make you feel better. Not to mention, women didn’t have a whole lot of media with which to contradict those statements.

It makes you wonder what other aspects of philosophy are based on petty feelings.

The truth of the matter comes out in St. Augustine: “Women should not be enlightened or educated in any way. They should, in fact, be segregated as they are the cause of hideous and involuntary erections in holy men.”

Yep, that sounds about right.

Crack!Ontology

•November 22, 2009 • Leave a Comment

The study of ontology includes the study of being, of what there is, and for my purposes, the study of the categories of being.

Suppose I want a limited ontology.

Suppose I want only seven categories of things in my ontology.

What would they be?

  1. Energy. It’s hard to get around this one.
  2. Space. I don’t believe in time, but I’m pretty sure there’s space.

    At this point, I’m essentially at atoms and void. Part of me wants to stop. Part of me wants to get to seven.

  3. Big Foot. I’m also pretty sure that Big Foot exists.
  4. Magic. I want magic to exist, but I also may include things like “wonder” and “awe” under magic.
  5. Mental Content. I think the content of our thoughts will never be reducible to energy or neurons.
  6. Emotions. I don’t think emotions are entirely mental.
  7. Chocolate. Because, I don’t want to exist in a world that doesn’t include chocolate.

Sense or Nonsense

•November 16, 2009 • 1 Comment

Does any philosophy really make sense?

Did our philosophical forefathers really think that they were reaching conclusions about truth, knowledge and reality?

Do we really think that anything can be known with certainty?

Probably not.

One of the reasons why philosophy is not a broadly studied field is because to do it, you have to be a little nutty. You have to be willing to set aside certain things that most people believe. You have to be willing to accept the fact that you are probably not going to find any answers to anything and that you are probably going to wind up more confused than you ever were before.

This is why I think that all philosophy is crack!philosophy.

The problem is that most people aren’t willing to laugh at it. Or themselves.

 
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.