Russel Value Philosophy Analysis

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Introduction
Practical Man Beyond Philosophy
Similarity to Plato
Similarity to Socrates
Conclusion
Works Cited

Introduction

In his work, Bertrand Russell defines philosophy as the study of uncertainty. First of all, this is because the questions this science asks do not have answers. However, no solution can be reached without first asking the question. While philosophical inquiry does not provide direct answers, it raises questions, leading to the discovery of responses that can form the basis of other sciences. The proven set of truths that exist today would not have been revealed without the original philosophical formulation of the question. At the same time, it should be understood that something ceases to be a philosophy as soon as it receives an answer and becomes an entirely new discipline. Thus philosophy, according to Russell, is indefinable and irrefutable.

The scientist in his work claims that philosophy differs from other sciences in that it is not about a specific subject like history is strictly about events in the past, and mathematics is about numbers. Philosophy is something more, embracing everything and nothing at once; it is a lot of unanswered questions on various subjects. Russell is right that the value of philosophy lies in its vagueness, and the importance lies in the questions, not the answers. It allows the person to reflect on things that broaden his or her perspective and help to recognize more possibilities.

Practical Man Beyond Philosophy

The author gives an example of a practical man in order to explain the significance of philosophy. He or she believes these people recognize only material needs and believes that people need food for the body first but ignore the need for food also for the mind (Russell 1). From this, one can understand that, according to Russell, philosophy is primarily food for a reason. When something becomes known in philosophy, it becomes a field for further study (Russell 4). For example, Newtons work was called the mathematical principles of natural philosophy, and what was written there, namely the study of the mind, is now part of physics. It shows that the question ceased to be philosophical when it was answered but, in doing so, gave rise to a new discipline.

Russell continues by stating that a person not connected with philosophy is living a life wrapped in prejudices from common sense. What it is customary to believe in at the age, what is characteristic of the nation, those thoughts that are born in the head all this happens as if involuntarily (Russell 4). Such a person strives to see the world as definite, finite, and prominent; general questions arouse no interest in him, and the possibility of knowing something indefinite is rejected. However, as soon as a person begins to understand and realize the value of philosophy, even ordinary everyday things make him think about problems that can never be fully and concretely answered. Russell argues that philosophy cannot know the answers to the questions it raises. Nevertheless, it gives a chance to get a lot of opportunities that expand human thinking and free it from the tyranny of custom.

Similarity to Plato

Russells position largely coincides with the views of such famous ancient philosophers as Plato and Socrates. A practical man, like a man imprisoned in a cave, only sees what he has been given. He/she refuses to learn anything new, and anyone who differs from him in opinion (in philosophy) is ill (wrong). That coincides with the Platonic interpretation of the myth: society ridicules the incomprehensible (Platos Divided Line, slide 42). It shows the individuals desire for the truth and societys attitude towards this.

Russell calls philosophies food for the mind, and if you think about the myth of Plato, it becomes clear that the knowledge gained from both philosophers is not something practical. Russell cites scientists of the exact sciences, such as mathematicians, historians, or even mineralogists, who, unlike a philosopher, can accurately say about the knowledge they have received because they were able to prove it (Russell 2). In the case of philosophy, it is the basis for all further research because it speaks of the search for meaning, which allows people to ask questions and explore this and other worlds. It is the truth, which, firstly, is not given to everyone, and secondly, the truth is limitless. Russell notes that as soon as the truth becomes apparent to a person, it ceases to be such; therefore, this path of knowledge is endless.

The cave, on the other hand, limits the visibility of a person and his or her mental activity; this is the framework of human knowledge. If the prisoner (man) goes beyond the picture (learns something new), his or her foundations do not change and will never return him (Cronin 8). The cave seems to be protecting itself from destruction. If the people inside her ever saw the sunlight, they would have laid out everything to get out of the darkness. Platos myth of the cave is its image in a fragment of the expression of the main ideas of the perception of the world, the state, and the place of a person (McCoy 7). Everyone can interpret his thoughts as his worldview suggests, and the value of this small part of world philosophy will not decrease from this.

Similarity to Socrates

Both philosophers, Russell and Plato, agree with Socrates, confirming that a meaningless life is not worth living. The philosophy of Socrates is a philosophy that proclaimed its primary task, the task of self-knowledge. The question of self-knowledge is, for Socrates, the question of whether there is a single principle that determines a persons life, his or her experience as a whole (Platos Divided Line, slide 45). The question of human existence is whether a person can ascend to unity with himself, to agreement with oneself, to be equal to himself with all the variability of human nature.

For Socrates, it was essential to reveal the nature of these concepts and their unchanging accurate content (idea). He raises the question of truth and believes that virtue is associated with proper knowledge (Rowett 124). Philosopher argues that knowledge itself is changeable, and people often reject what they think over time. The same thing happens in the myth of Platos cave, which is also reflected in Russells practical man. Therefore, absolute truth is inaccessible to man and only the property of higher powers (Kader 5). Of course, no mortals will ever become equal to God, but the desire for wisdom is essential to human virtue. Although the individual cannot know anything with certainty, this does not mean he or she should not strive to acquire this wisdom.

Conclusion

Russells position on the value of philosophy was relevant not only during the philosophers life. This idea can be traced back long before our era and is still popular today. Russell explains that philosophical inquiry does not always lead to achieving some material need. They promote personal advancement through liberation from ignorance and enable harmony with oneself. The benefit of philosophy is that it helps a person overcome limiting beliefs that hinder further progress. Philosophy is the development of ourselves, which opens the world from a new perspective.

Works Cited

Cronin, Brian. Phenomenology of Human Understanding. ISD LLC, 2018.

Kader, Thomas. On the Pragmatic Functions of Platos Forms in Process Philosophy. 2020.

McCoy, Marina. Image and Argument in Platos Republic. State University of New York Press, 2020.

Platos Divided Line and Allegory of the Cave. (n.d.). PowerPoint presentation.

Rowett, Catherine. Knowledge and Truth in Plato: Stepping Past the Shadow of Socrates. Oxford University Press, 2018.

Russell, Bertrand. The Value of Philosophy. The Problems of Philosophy, Oxford University Press, 1959.

Click Here To Order Now!