In every question of social interaction, the answer depends on the circumstances surrounding that question. When someone asks what to do about something, one must know more details in order to give an opinion.
Perhaps that is my problem with philosophy. I’ve taken philosophy classes (for fun), and I always got in huge discussions with my professors and TAs about whatever it was we were talking about. I guess things were so abstract that it seemed quite pointless to me sometimes.
Also, it always seemed that belief in God was seen as a weakness. Always found that quite funny. It’s like there is a campaign out there…”Being an Atheist is COOL. Join Now!” Come on now…it doesn’t matter! hehe. In any case, I enjoy reflecting on those experiences, and it has taught me to not get so frustrated at sheer stupidity. Well…sometimes. 😀
I’m going to go clean now. And eat.
Related Posts
3 thoughts on “Topics of Conversation”
Comments are closed.
Yeah, I have the same problems with philosophy. At times it can get so broad and pointless. I hate the way that everything is an acceptable answer. Granted, I was a little more fortunate going to a Christian College, so spirituality was not ignored –but then again, it had that “the only way to bring spirituality to the discussion is through Christianity” type of attitude.
So… I agree. The overly cerebral Occidental philosophers are just that, while the Oriental philosophers seem to constantly reiterate wisdom already contained in Holy Texts. Western ‘philosophers’ with whom I’ve interacted tended to marginalize Eastern philosophy and really get into thier abstractive, logical, Social Contract-esque ideas, and in the interim completely ignore the glaring faults of thier arguement. Maybe that’s a bit much, but like I said, I agree.
However, since I began college, I’ve found a great deal of peace with these people. Because they are used to the logical, argumentative method of philosophic exchange, we already know which key we should try opening thier hearts with first. We already know they’re second valley all the way, and I’ve found that they’ll usually listen, think, eventually disagree, and probably scoff later; BUT I know that a seed’s been planted, and sometime in the future they might run across the Faith in a different, perhaps even non-professional context and that seed might be able to take root. So while I’m frusterated, I’m also thankful, because in some ways, when I can stay serene, they are some of the easiest ppl to teach.
I’ve noticed that about the weakness of belief in God. Saying that I believe in God sometimes make me seem that I have a flawed faculty in reasoning, that my logic is in some way distorted by faith. It confounds me. Einstein believed in God – does that make his theories nonsense?! Gah.