How Important Is Philosophy?
Posted by geneligman 10 years, 4 months ago to Education
I recently went back to college to earn a bachelor of science in mechanical engineering. While in school I learned a great many things that I had not already known, even though I had been up to my elbows in engineering fields all of my adult life. I learned the underlying principles for equations and work practices that I had used in nuclear power, in silicon manufacturing, in high vacuum equipment engineering, in automation and robotics. Needless to say, I got a great deal out of my degree. There were 20 some odd other people in my class of mech engineers (class of 2012 at Washington State University in Vancouver). Of all of the people in my class, there was only one other that I think got as much out of what he learned as I did.
What was the greatest of all the things I learned during that time? A hint, I did not learn this part in class. In fact, it was not taught at my school, or at any school that I know of. Yes, the greatest of what I learned was philosophy. Well, how can that be when I learned so much of the technical sciences and engineering principles? It is because the philosophy gave me clarity such as I have never had in my 40 something years of living. I learned the engineering principles because I now understood their value. I was able to focus on my studies with great ardor, because I knew that nothing comes for free. I was able to integrate the knowledge into my broad understanding of engineering applications because I had a new grasp on epistemology.
Most importantly, though, my study of Objectivism for the last five or six years helped me to FINALLY understand the secret to success. Now, I am empowered to work toward my success and be assured that it will come. How am I able to know the secret to success from studying Objectivism? There is no section on how to become successful in OPAR. I can tell you this. If you study the philosophy with an earnest desire to find a workable framework for life. If you decide to take this philosophy as a way of life, rather than an intellectual exercise, or a platform of party talk ideas. If you really apply this philosophy to your life, you will also discover the secret of success, which means you will discover the secret to happiness. Sure, I could tell you what it is that I discovered. You will only say, "Oh, I already know that." But I guarantee you likely DO NOT know that...not really. You don't understand it on a deep enough level to understand the way forward. I will give you a hint though. It is in the branch of philosophy that starts with A is A.
So yes, philosophy was the greatest of what I learned. I am now starting a business, and I know it will be successful. How do I know? ::grins::
What was the greatest of all the things I learned during that time? A hint, I did not learn this part in class. In fact, it was not taught at my school, or at any school that I know of. Yes, the greatest of what I learned was philosophy. Well, how can that be when I learned so much of the technical sciences and engineering principles? It is because the philosophy gave me clarity such as I have never had in my 40 something years of living. I learned the engineering principles because I now understood their value. I was able to focus on my studies with great ardor, because I knew that nothing comes for free. I was able to integrate the knowledge into my broad understanding of engineering applications because I had a new grasp on epistemology.
Most importantly, though, my study of Objectivism for the last five or six years helped me to FINALLY understand the secret to success. Now, I am empowered to work toward my success and be assured that it will come. How am I able to know the secret to success from studying Objectivism? There is no section on how to become successful in OPAR. I can tell you this. If you study the philosophy with an earnest desire to find a workable framework for life. If you decide to take this philosophy as a way of life, rather than an intellectual exercise, or a platform of party talk ideas. If you really apply this philosophy to your life, you will also discover the secret of success, which means you will discover the secret to happiness. Sure, I could tell you what it is that I discovered. You will only say, "Oh, I already know that." But I guarantee you likely DO NOT know that...not really. You don't understand it on a deep enough level to understand the way forward. I will give you a hint though. It is in the branch of philosophy that starts with A is A.
So yes, philosophy was the greatest of what I learned. I am now starting a business, and I know it will be successful. How do I know? ::grins::
To attempt an answer, I'll start by making some predictions about your experience...
Let's see here... we're talking about epistemology. You know what you know because you have an integrated epistemological foundation for your philosophy. You accept the axioms that existence exists, consciousness exists, and identity exists. Presumably, you would not be posting here if you did not accept the primacy of existence.
Further, you recognize that logic extends out of two basic operations: union and separation (my words), or integration and differentiation. Syllogisms would have great value to you, whether consciously or unconsciously, and you likely trust them more than you trust straight algebra, calculus, and differential equations without context. "1 + 1 = 2" probably has less value than "contextual genus + contextual differentia = contextual class". You see that contextual classes are disposable, as this is extremely important to the process of non-contradiction. You may see numbers alone as insignificant if you cannot determine whether they represent value, sequence, or identity.
I'd wager that you saw your courses less as discrete topics, and something more like different angles from which you were studying the same reality. This would have given you a certain "fluid" experience as you moved from class to class, and you would have tested every new bit of information against the rest in order to validate and integrate it.
You would have challenged every contradiction. You probably do not believe that the observer changes the observed through observation (unless you have theorized your own explanation of the phenomenon). You may believe that quantum physics is convenient mathematically, but bunk with respect to its ability to describe physical reality. I doubt that you believe in relativistic length or time dilation except in the strictest sense that they predict how bodies in motion will "appear" to a given inertial reference frame.
You probably see statics, dynamics, fluid dynamics, and even some aspects of thermodynamics as functional enough for large scale predictions, but you're not about to assert that the sum of all other seemingly inconsequential variables are without consequence. The smaller the scale, the more consequential the sum of these other variables becomes.
You're likely intrigued by the reality that forces are not actions of one body upon another, but rather, interactions of bodies that all have the peculiar nature of being subject to the inverse-square law. You may reject the assertion that "every action has an equal and opposite reaction" because no single body can be said to have acted.
You may believe that there is a universal secret hidden within the right hand rule. You might even have some theories about what that secret is.
I'm betting that you have a healthy understanding of the laws of thermodynamics (notably the first law) and perhaps have a well-integrated methodology by which you trace them back to epistemology.
It's likely that while you reject the idea of a perpetual motion machine, you've conceived of some models for achieving something close to perpetual motion though high efficiency.
I'm thinking that the "fluid" experience of changing the lens (course) by which you were studying reality kept you "in the zone", and intensely focused on integrating your knowledge of the true subject: "reality". This may be the "secret to happiness". In my experience, being "in the zone", is immensely rewarding.
How am I doing so far? Which of these predictions is correct/incorrect? Knowing the answers to these predictions might help me figure out your "secret to success".
Some of your predictions are right on the money, some are in the general direction.
Of course, I accept the axioms, in fact, it was my study of existence exists, A is A, and every cause has an effect and every effect has a cause, that propelled me to achieve a great deal more than my classmates. I use integration and differentiation, generally, but use an analogy of genus and species more often, and of course all knowledge is contextual. Those that separate knowledge from context are driving down the rationalist road. The concept of non-contradiction helped me to understand some very hard to grasp material. It seemed contradictory, but I knew it was likely not so. Thus, I re-evaluated my premises.
Yes, I challenged every contradiction, and still do. There are a number of... let's call them idioms.. used in the sciences, such as "nature abhors a vacuum" and "entropy causes everything to move from order to chaos" and others that really bug me because they are patently false if you examine reality. Yet they are mindlessly repeated by intelligent people as if they are truth, simply because their professor told them so.
I think the mathematics of quantuum physics is modeling true behavior, but that the explanation is obviously bunk. I absolutely do not think that observing an entity changes it, provided that the observation is passive.
I have not spent time considering the right hand rule, thanks for the tip.
I have a decent understanding of thermodynamics, enough to throw the bullshit flag when necessary, and well enough to predict outcomes of some processes before they occur, but definitely not well enough to predict processes like organic chemistry.
I think the idea that the speed of light is the ultimate speed limit of the universe is a silly idea.
I have no interest in perpetual motion machinery, but spend a great deal of time considering how to get another 5 percent efficiency out of a standard thermal cycle power generation facility.
BUT...... epistemology alone does not provide happiness. There can be no separation between mind and body, between thought and action, between plan and execution. Epistemology is simply a tool that one uses to find errors, correct them, and move on. It is a tool that one uses to invent and create, to verify and reject falsehoods. But it does not stand alone, and though I know there are many who consider epistemology to be the most important of the branches, I disagree.
My secret to success, Wonky, which I regret that anyone would consider to be a secret, though it might as well be for the lack of people who understand it, is rooted more firmly in metaphysics than in epistemology. I cannot separate one from the other, though, after all I understand metaphysics because of my epistemology. Of the two, though, my epistemology is weaker. It is still a branch that I need to work on.
Does this help with your profile of me?
Paramount. Since philosophers of note do not all agree upon the definition of philosophy. I like to think of it simply as one's understanding of the world around them and their belief or lack thereof of an afterlife (for me a side issue/branch of philosophy). Many philosophers have tried to prove or disprove the existence of God, but is not possible IMHO. It makes more sense for me to concern myself with the here and now. Regardless of what one believes of an afterlife, it is more important to me how people deal with this reality. Discerning the realities and axioms of this temporal existence are the building blocks of sound reasoning. Many people, without the proper examination of their epistemology and their metaphysics are clearly trying desperately to make their way in this world without examination of their premises. This is like stumbling in the dark while looking for your shoes. Sure, you could stumble upon the right path, but with proper footing and enlightenment the proper path will be more easily ascertained.
Since you are a mechanical engineer, I would suggest the example of someone designing a simple air compressor tank. The metaphysics are the physical/mechanical properties of the materials to be used and the forces applied to them (PSI etc.). The epistemology is the knowledge of the metaphysical properties which guides one as to proper design and to calculate the proper gauge of the material used. Without these he might guess/think a tank of too thin a gauge of steel is sufficient. When the tank blows up because the designer lacked proper understanding of the fundamentals or the understanding required to calculate the necessary specifications, he may think it was defective material or manufacturing, when in fact it was his metaphysics and epistemology that were at fault... Without checking one's premises he is likely to repeat the same mistake and we then have Einstein's definition of insanity... It could also be fatal and persistence would persist no more.
Next, I would place perseverance/persistence as essential to success. Of course luck doesn't hurt, but one need not wait around for luck when perspiration is available. :)
There are absolutes. Existence exists. A is A.
Respectfully,
O.A.
Programming, writing, and teaching are abstract tasks, in which ideas are both the subject and the means to understanding it.
We see here in The Gulch the nice people with good intentions who only understand Atlas Shrugged as a political novel. or a morality play. But Ayn Rand felt that her greatest contribution was through the fundamentals of epistemology and metaphysics. She summed it up in her description of Hank Rearden's mills - Every girder was placed in answer in one question: Right or wrong?
In computer culture, hackers were programmers who believed in doing The Right Thing. You don't cut corners. You don't make do. Design trade-offs are real, but sacrifices of quality are intolerable. That desire to do The Right Thing is what spun Fairchild from Shockley Labs and then spawned the "Fairchildren" and ultimately the computer revolution of Silicon Valley. Metaphysics (the quantum mechanics of zeroes and ones) is inseparable from the morality of an open and competitive market.
Philosophy matters.
Sadly, most people never take the time to even understand, or to discover, what their values are.
As for philosophy, if you're going to follow Objectivism as a way of life, there are two books you might want to read:
http://www.amazon.com/God-Problem-Godles...
http://www.amazon.com/Without-Prayer-Ran...
But rationality alone is powerless without application. I agree that hard work matters.
That said, no magic formula tells you when you need to persevere over all obstacles and when you need to change your path based on your experience. Wisdom cannot be reduced to a set of commandments.
- Calvin Coolidge
Also by one of the better Presidents:
"Don't expect to build up the weak by pulling down the strong."
Calvin Coolidge
"Collecting more taxes than is absolutely necessary is legalized robbery."
Calvin Coolidge
"We need more of the Office Desk and less of the Show Window in politics. Let men in office substitute the midnight oil for the limelight."
Calvin Coolidge
"Perhaps one of the most important accomplishments of my administration has been minding my own business."
Calvin Coolidge
"Duty is not collective; it is personal."
Calvin Coolidge