Ask a question

What Is The New Philosophical Era That Humanity Needs

Which era of philosophy changed human morality more: Ancient Greek philosophy or the 19th century Golden German Age of philosophy?

Plainly the Greek.  It can be cogently argued that, with ancient Athens et. al., the individual became - qualitatively and, yes, relatively - more important than any collective association.  Individuals could formally vote for the first time in history, their ballots scriven on potsherds, and this was further enhanced by the notion of private ownership of property, rather than, e.g., everything belonging to the monarch, who could redistribute as he or she saw fit.Without the ancient Greeks, the very concept of humanity as understood and expounded and expanded upon in the West could never have come into being.  There would never have been an Enlightenment and any hypothetical scientific revolution would have faced even more official opprobrium than historically occurred.And we are, in more than one way and in more than one arena, still fighting for the values of individualism and the validity of individual choice.For a thumbnail insight into this through the life of one individual, don't look to Plato or Pericles, but, rather, Themistocles - the individual who arguably enabled the preservation of individualism more than any other, ever.

Do you think that philosophy is still needed in the current era we are living in?

The world will always need philosophy just as any tree will always need its roots. Just about any modern discipline of study was born from the minds of philosophers. For example, Aristotle’s works ranged from writings on politics, biology, physics, meteorology, the soul, ethics, etc; the concept of the atom was devised by pre-Socratic philosophers over 2,000 years ago; and the pythagoreans were philosophers who believed the world could be defined by mathematics.It should also be noted- the word “philosophia,” in Ancient Greek translates to “love of wisdom.” So, first, it’s not meant to be about necessity. Philosophers are simply people who have a love for learning. They exercise and develop the unique ability we humans have- rationality. And, secondly, when has the world ever not needed wisdom?

What does humanity need the most?

To come out of the cocoon called 'Humanity'!Swami Vivekananda told this story at the Parliament of the World's Religions on 15 September 1893. Quote:" A frog lived in a well. It had lived there for a long time. It was born there and brought up there, and yet was a little, small frog. Of course the evolutionists were not there then to tell us whether the frog lost its eyes or not, but, for our story's sake, we must take it for granted that it had its eyes, and that it every day cleansed the water of all the worms and bacilli that lived in it with an energy that would do credit to our modern bacteriologists. In this way it went on and became a little sleek and fat. Well, one day another frog that lived in the sea came and fell into the well. "Where are you from?" "I am from the sea."Frog : "The sea! How big is that? Is it as big as my well?"  "The sea! How big is that? Is it as big as my well?" and he took a leap from one side of the well to the other. "My friend," said the frog of the sea, "how do you compare the sea with your little well?”Then the frog took another leap and asked, "Is your sea so big?" "What nonsense you speak, to compare the sea with your well!" "Well, then," said the frog of the well, "nothing can be bigger than my well; there can be nothing bigger than this; this fellow is a liar, so turn him out." That has been the difficulty all the while. I am a Hindu. I am sitting in my own little well and thinking that the whole world is my little well. The Christian sits in his little well and thinks the whole world is his well. The Mohammedan sits in his little well and thinks that is the whole world. I have to thank you of America for the great attempt you are making to break down the barriers of this little world of ours, and hope that, in the future, the Lord will help you to accomplish your purpose."Unquote:Along with the tags Hindu, Christian, Mohemmedan etc., One needs to let go of tags such as human, humanity as well., to get the bigger picture.

Philosophy question about Hume and Goodman?

I'm having trouble answering this question. Any input would be helpful.

I am writing a philosophy paper in which I will compare and contrast David Hume and Nelson Goodman's positions on induction. More specifically, I need to explain how each find induciton to be an unjustifiable means to knowledge, and how their positions are similar and different.

I have the basic knowledge about the topic, but I would like to hear different perspectives from other philisophical intellects. Any info might be new to me, so any help would be highly apprectiated. Thanks.

What makes a person, a person? (Philosophy)?

Just to be safe, I don't really need complete answers Actually, you can just name drop the philosophers and maybe their most known theories or readings that have some concern with what makes a person, a person, or personal identity. I can research from there. All I need is a little push to start my study.

Thank you very much for those who could help. :)

In education, what is the importance of philosophy?

A philosophy of education is a system of thinking about what education is for and how it should be done.In order to know how best to do something, you need to be very clear about what it is that you are trying to accomplish.At first glance, the idea of a philosophy of education seems a little like “well, DUH - it’s teaching the students!”But - what do we teach them? How to do a job? To be good citizens? To think for themselves? To cooperate with leaders? To focus on science? To focus on civics? Art? Philosophy? To balance their lives or throw themselves entirely into what is most important? Important to whom - the student? parents? leaders? experts? Which leaders? Experts in what?And here is the problem: The answer to almost every question of that type is YES. But there are a limited number of hours in a day, and for some of those, YES implies NO to another.For example, in teaching math, we can either give students the exact method to do something, or we can guide them to discover the method for themselves. The first is much faster, and leaves more time for practice. But students forget what they have been told, and remember what they have discovered for themselves. And the process of discovering procedures for themselves trains them to be ready for new challenges.Another philosophical question in math education: do we let students use technology, or do we require them to calculate by hand? Calculating by hand develops speed and efficiency in basic calculations, but takes time that could be used learning more advanced math. And using technology is how they will do math outside of school.Questions like these come up often in teaching and in discussing education. By thinking carefully about these questions ahead of time, we are able to act on, and explain, our best ideas and most important values in the moment. When a student is struggling and a parent is asking why you aren’t doing things the classical way or why you aren’t using the latest fad, you need to have already thought about it. You need to know why you are doing what you are doing, and neither “because that’s how we always have always done it” nor “that’s what this book says we should do” is good enough.

Would a philosopher make a good Human Resource Manager?

If the philosopher became educated and then certified in human resources, and then continued to learn about human resources they probably would. A great HR Manager must know so much in the area of compliance which is very specific and not philosophic. If they had the philosophy that a HR Manager must be qualified in education and training because if they were not, they would bring harm to the employees as well as the employer, they would be well on their way to being a good HR Manager.

Why did philosophy emerge only in Greek and modern era?

Well, that's just not true.First of all, the western philosophical tradition is not the only one.Second, it's in many ways medieval philosophy that came closest to the methods and concerns of modern analytic philosophy, especially as concerns logic and language, from foundational concepts like obligation to specialized problem areas like syncategoremata. Medieval logicians lacked the symbolic vocabulary modern logic employs, and yet came far nearer to the latter than the logic of someone more “modern” like Hegel (who may well have invented the “modern” self-understanding of “modernity”).There is a tendency to discount the philosophical interest of writers who worked from the assumption that the universe has a divine superintendent. If that means you never encounter Augustine, Boethius or John Scotus Eriugena, that's your loss. And it is a loss!The Renaissance was also rich with philosophy: there are wonderful guidebooks to the thinkers of that period by Ernst Cassirer, Paul Oskar Kristeller, Charles Trinkaus, Anthony Grafton, Quentin Skinner, Walter Ong, and countless others.Want to see what people have been thinking just in the west, leaving aside the richness of Eastern thought (which is staggering)?Try: The Cambridge History of Later Greek and Early Medieval Philosophy; The Cambridge History of Medieval Philosophy (edited by the late Norman Kretzmann, a true giant); The Cambridge History of Renaissance Philosophy (edited by the late Charles Schmitt, a master expositor of Renaissance Aristotelianisms, plural); The Cambridge History of Seventeenth-Century Philosophy. These will guide you to countless texts that reward study richly. From there move to the Enlightenment, and so on.The study of philosophy nowadays is specialized and tends to deal with fewer subjects than philosophers once considered. This is in part because some parts of philosophy were absorbed into the sciences; it is in part because of the drive toward secularization; it is because we, in our present “episteme,” think we have some problems knocked. But that does not mean that the rich traditions of the past do not serve human needs or answer human interests. You may not ever have heard of Peter of Spain, Marsilius of Padua, or Marsilio Ficino — but that is because modern education is a slapdash gyp, not because they don't offer rich rewards and their own particular insights.

What would a new religion for a post-human, post-singularity era look like?

Here are some conjectures on the topic:If the brute survival era is followed by the organized warfare era, which is followed by the economic era, the next era might be devoted to intellectual meaning. However, this requires providing for economic needs. The eras beyond these are the eras that make the previous afraid, beginning with 1, e.g. 5. High-functional, 6. Genius, 7. Golden Age, and 8. Transcendent.A new religion would be easy to think about for these people, but they would expect something new, so combining the best old categories is a good guess. I get Asceticureanism or Aestheticureanism by combining Asceticism and Epicureanism. This religion would support diet regimens like small amounts of candy, sugared drinks instead of meat, etc., which is likely perfect for advanced manufacturing.Art such as Hyper-Cubism: A Step Beyond Cubism by HyperCubism may be important.Perpetual motion economics may be important: Perpetual Motion that Might Actually WorkThere are also books on Asceticureanism such as The Spiritual Writings (Coppedge), and Doctrines of Asceticureanism and others. It helps that many of these attempt to orient the seeker towards a life of many dimensions. Some of the books are on topics such as immortality and time-travel, which makes them more interesting. Amazon.com: Nathan Coppedge: Books, Biography, Blog, Audiobooks, Kindle

What is the next age/era of human advancement?

I see several major areas of the 'next human advancement. Most importantly, I see advancements in energy, society and the human body itself. Then I see real proof of extra-terrestrial life.Energy-wise, we are near a breakthrough in commercially available fusion energy as exampled (principally) by the recent scale-up of the Tokamat magnetically confined plasma energy device. Societally, I see major shifts in global economic redistribution to remove the enormous wealth and services gap currently existing in even some of the major developed countries, America included. Regarding the human body, we are near a transhuman singularity - the enhancement of human abilities and brain-power through synthetic devices and bio-electronic implants. There also will be real steps in uploading personalities into mass nanoscale storage which will eventually lead to whole segments of human population achieving immortality.The I see the 'discovery' of exo-life, or the 'disclosure' of previous sentient  alien contact (which I believe has happened).