Philosophy

== Conceptions of philosophy ==
{{see also|Metaphilosophy}}

=== General conception ===
The practice of philosophy is characterized by several general features: it is a form of rational inquiry, it aims to be systematic, and it tends to critically reflect on its own methods and presuppositions.<ref>{{multiref |1={{harvnb|Audi|2006|loc=[https://www.encyclopedia.com/philosophy-and-religion/philosophy/philosophy-terms-and-concepts/philosophy Lead Section, § Conclusion]}} |2={{harvnb|Quinton|2005|p=702}} |3={{harvnb|Regenbogen|2010|loc=[https://meiner.de/enzyklopadie-philosophie-14071.html Philosophiebegriffe]}} |4={{harvnb|EB Staff|2023a}} |5={{harvnb|OUP Staff|2020}} |6={{harvnb|Adler|2000}} }}</ref> It requires attentively thinking long and carefully about the provocative, vexing, and enduring problems central to the human condition.{{sfn|Perry|Bratman|Fischer|2010|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=0ndAAQAAIAAJ 4]}}

The philosophical pursuit of wisdom involves asking general and fundamental questions. It often does not result in straightforward answers but may help a person to better understand the topic, examine their life, dispel confusion, and overcome prejudices and self-deceptive ideas associated with common sense.<ref>{{multiref |1={{harvnb|Russell|1912|p=91}} |2={{harvnb|Blackwell|2013|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=rRrfO14H5i0C&pg=PA148 148]}} |3={{harvnb|Pojman|2009|page=2}} |4={{harvnb|Kenny|2004|p=xv}} |5={{harvnb|Vintiadis|2020|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=t8P4DwAAQBAJ&pg=PT137 137]}} }}</ref> For example, Socrates stated that "[[the unexamined life is not worth living]]" to highlight the role of philosophical inquiry in understanding one's own existence.{{sfn|Plato|2023|loc=[https://standardebooks.org/ebooks/plato/dialogues/benjamin-jowett/text/apology#apology-text Apology]}}{{sfn|McCutcheon|2014|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=vpzCBQAAQBAJ&pg=PA26 26]}} And according to [[Bertrand Russell]], "the man who has no tincture of philosophy goes through life imprisoned in the prejudices derived from common sense, from the habitual beliefs of his age or his nation, and from convictions which have grown up in his mind without the cooperation or consent of his deliberate reason."<ref>{{multiref |1={{harvnb|Russell|1912|p=91}} |2={{harvnb|Blackwell|2013|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=rRrfO14H5i0C&pg=PA148 148]}} }}</ref>

=== Academic definitions ===
{{main|Definitions of philosophy}}
Attempts to provide more precise definitions of philosophy are controversial<ref>{{multiref |1={{harvnb|Quinton|2005|p=702}} |2={{harvnb|Regenbogen|2010|loc=[https://meiner.de/enzyklopadie-philosophie-14071.html Philosophiebegriffe]}} }}</ref> and are studied in [[metaphilosophy]].{{sfn|Overgaard|Gilbert|Burwood|2013|pp=vii, 17}} Some approaches argue that there is a set of essential features shared by all parts of philosophy. Others see only weaker family resemblances or contend that it is merely an empty blanket term.<ref>{{multiref |1={{harvnb|Overgaard|Gilbert|Burwood|2013|pp=[https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/abs/an-introduction-to-metaphilosophy/what-is-philosophy/9D6F6F1186D1FF68A23B97B17CC810EE 20, 44]|loc=What Is Philosophy?}} |2={{harvnb|Mittelstraß|2005|loc=[https://www.springer.com/de/book/9783476021083 Philosophie]}} }}</ref> Precise definitions are often only accepted by theorists belonging to a certain [[philosophical movement]] and are revisionistic according to Søren Overgaard et al. in that many presumed parts of philosophy would not deserve the title "philosophy" if they were true.<ref>{{multiref |1={{harvnb|Joll}} |2={{harvnb|Overgaard|Gilbert|Burwood|2013|pp=[https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/abs/an-introduction-to-metaphilosophy/what-is-philosophy/9D6F6F1186D1FF68A23B97B17CC810EE 20–21, 25, 35, 39]|loc=What Is Philosophy?}} }}</ref>

Some definitions characterize philosophy in relation to its method, like pure reasoning. Others focus on its topic, for example, as the study of the biggest patterns of the world as a whole or as the attempt to answer the big questions.<ref>{{multiref |1={{harvnb|Overgaard|Gilbert|Burwood|2013|pp=[https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/abs/an-introduction-to-metaphilosophy/what-is-philosophy/9D6F6F1186D1FF68A23B97B17CC810EE 20–22]|loc=What Is Philosophy?}} |2={{harvnb|Rescher|2013|loc=[https://books.google.com/books?id=RIx_k41e1xAC 1. The Nature of Philosophy]|pp=1–3}} |3={{harvnb|Nuttall|2013|loc=1. The Nature of Philosophy|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=luc-Hf_bEOIC&pg=PT12 12–13]}} }}</ref> Such an approach is pursued by [[Immanuel Kant]], who holds that the task of philosophy is united by four questions: "What can I know?"; "What should I do?"; "What may I hope?"; and "What is the human being?"<ref>{{multiref |1={{harvnb|Guyer|2014|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=a4T8AgAAQBAJ&pg=PA7 7–8]}} |2={{harvnb|Kant|1998|p=A805/B833}} |3={{harvnb|Kant|1992|p=9:25}} }}</ref> Both approaches have the problem that they are usually either too wide, by including non-philosophical disciplines, or too narrow, by excluding some philosophical sub-disciplines.{{sfn|Overgaard|Gilbert|Burwood|2013|pp=[https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/abs/an-introduction-to-metaphilosophy/what-is-philosophy/9D6F6F1186D1FF68A23B97B17CC810EE 20–22]|loc=What Is Philosophy?}}

Many definitions of philosophy emphasize its intimate relation to science.{{sfn|Regenbogen|2010|loc=[https://meiner.de/enzyklopadie-philosophie-14071.html Philosophiebegriffe]}} In this sense, philosophy is sometimes understood as a proper science in its own right. According to some [[Naturalism (philosophy)|naturalistic philosophers]], such as [[W. V. O. Quine]], philosophy is an empirical yet abstract science that is concerned with wide-ranging empirical patterns instead of particular observations.<ref>{{multiref |1={{harvnb|Overgaard|Gilbert|Burwood|2013|pp=[https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/abs/an-introduction-to-metaphilosophy/what-is-philosophy/9D6F6F1186D1FF68A23B97B17CC810EE 26–27]|loc=What Is Philosophy?}} |2={{harvnb|Hylton|Kemp|2020}} }}</ref> Science-based definitions usually face the problem of explaining why philosophy in its long history has not progressed to the same extent or in the same way as the sciences.<ref>{{multiref |1={{harvnb|Overgaard|Gilbert|Burwood|2013|pp=[https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/abs/an-introduction-to-metaphilosophy/what-is-philosophy/9D6F6F1186D1FF68A23B97B17CC810EE 25–27]|loc=What Is Philosophy?}} |2={{harvnb|Chalmers|2015|pp=[https://philpapers.org/rec/CHAWIT-15 3–4]}} |3={{harvnb|Dellsén|Lawler|Norton|2021|pp=814–815}} }}</ref> This problem is avoided by seeing philosophy as an immature or provisional science whose subdisciplines cease to be philosophy once they have fully developed.<ref>{{multiref |1={{harvnb|Regenbogen|2010|loc=[https://meiner.de/enzyklopadie-philosophie-14071.html Philosophiebegriffe]}} |2={{harvnb|Mittelstraß|2005|loc=[https://www.springer.com/de/book/9783476021083 Philosophie]}} |3={{harvnb|Overgaard|Gilbert|Burwood|2013|pp=[https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/abs/an-introduction-to-metaphilosophy/what-is-philosophy/9D6F6F1186D1FF68A23B97B17CC810EE 27–30]|loc=What Is Philosophy?}} }}</ref> In this sense, philosophy is sometimes described as "the midwife of the sciences".<ref>{{multiref |1={{harvnb|Hacker|2013|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=8W1BAQAAQBAJ&pg=PA6 6]}} |2={{harvnb|Regenbogen|2010|loc=[https://meiner.de/enzyklopadie-philosophie-14071.html Philosophiebegriffe]}} }}</ref>

Other definitions focus on the contrast between science and philosophy. A common theme among many such conceptions is that philosophy is concerned with [[Meaning (philosophy)|meaning]], [[understanding]], or the clarification of language.<ref>{{multiref |1={{harvnb|Overgaard|Gilbert|Burwood|2013|pp=[https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/abs/an-introduction-to-metaphilosophy/what-is-philosophy/9D6F6F1186D1FF68A23B97B17CC810EE 34–36]|loc=What Is Philosophy?}} |2={{harvnb|Rescher|2013|loc=[https://books.google.com/books?id=RIx_k41e1xAC 1. The Nature of Philosophy]|pp=1–2}} }}</ref> According to one view, philosophy is [[conceptual analysis]], which involves finding the [[necessary and sufficient conditions]] for the application of concepts.<ref>{{multiref |1={{harvnb|Overgaard|Gilbert|Burwood|2013|pp=[https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/abs/an-introduction-to-metaphilosophy/what-is-philosophy/9D6F6F1186D1FF68A23B97B17CC810EE 20–21, 29]|loc=What Is Philosophy?}} |2={{harvnb|Nuttall|2013|loc=1. The Nature of Philosophy|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=luc-Hf_bEOIC&pg=PT12 12–13]}} |3={{harvnb|Shaffer|2015|pp=[https://www.jstor.org/stable/26602327 555–556]}} }}</ref> Another definition characterizes philosophy as ''[[thinking]] about thinking'' to emphasize its self-critical, reflective nature.<ref>{{multiref |1={{harvnb|Overgaard|Gilbert|Burwood|2013|pp=[https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/abs/an-introduction-to-metaphilosophy/what-is-philosophy/9D6F6F1186D1FF68A23B97B17CC810EE 36–37, 43]|loc=What Is Philosophy?}} |2={{harvnb|Nuttall|2013|loc=1. The Nature of Philosophy|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=luc-Hf_bEOIC&pg=PT12 12]}} }}</ref> A further approach presents philosophy as a [[linguistic]] therapy. According to [[Ludwig Wittgenstein]], for instance, philosophy aims at dispelling misunderstandings to which humans are susceptible due to the confusing structure of [[Natural language|ordinary language]].<ref>{{multiref |1={{harvnb|Regenbogen|2010|loc=[https://meiner.de/enzyklopadie-philosophie-14071.html Philosophiebegriffe]}} |2={{harvnb|Joll|loc=Lead Section, § 2c. Ordinary Language Philosophy and the Later Wittgenstein}} |3={{harvnb|Biletzki|Matar|2021}} }}</ref>

[[Phenomenology (philosophy)|Phenomenologists]], such as [[Edmund Husserl]], characterize philosophy as a "rigorous science" investigating [[essence]]s.<ref>{{multiref |1={{harvnb|Joll|loc=§ 4.a.i}} |2={{harvnb|Gelan|2020|p=[https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-29357-4_6 98]|loc=Husserl's Idea of Rigorous Science and Its Relevance for the Human and Social Sciences}} |3={{harvnb|Ingarden|1975|pp=[https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-94-010-1689-6_3 8–11]|loc=The Concept of Philosophy as Rigorous Science}} |4={{harvnb|Tieszen|2005|p=[https://books.google.com/books?id=2fgQ_fuCcKAC&pg=PA100 100]}} }}</ref> They practice a radical [[epoche|suspension]] of theoretical assumptions about reality to get back to the "things themselves", that is, as originally given in experience. They contend that this base-level of experience provides the foundation for higher-order theoretical knowledge, and that one needs to understand the former to understand the latter.{{sfn|Smith|loc=§ 2.b}}

An early approach found in [[Ancient Greek philosophy|ancient Greek]] and [[Roman philosophy]] is that philosophy is the spiritual practice of developing one's rational capacities.<ref>{{multiref |1={{harvnb|Banicki|2014|p=[https://philpapers.org/rec/BANPAT 7]}} |2={{harvnb|Hadot|1995|loc=[https://philpapers.org/rec/HADPAA 11. Philosophy as a Way of Life]}} }}</ref> This practice is an expression of the philosopher's love of wisdom and has the aim of improving one's [[well-being]] by leading a reflective life.{{sfn|Grimm|Cohoe|2021|pp=[https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ejop.12562 236–237]}} For example, the [[Stoics]] saw philosophy as an exercise to train the mind and thereby achieve [[eudaimonia]] and flourish in life.{{sfn|Sharpe|Ure|2021|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=LIstEAAAQBAJ&pg=PA76 76, 80]}}