Ferriols, Lessing And Russell On Philosophy
Human beings are innately inquisitive creatures who are equipped with a powerful intellectual capacity. With this, Ferriols, Lessing and Russell’s made their own strong claims about Philosophy. I shall support their claims as Philosophy is not about finding out the answers to the fundamental questions, it is about the process of trying to find these answers with the use of reasoning with experience rather than accepting without questioning conventional views or traditional authority.
Roque Ferriols depicted that my auditory and visual senses are not enough to understand and to reason out something. To experience is one of the important factors in order to further understand what is really going on. Philosophy is to be applied as I immersed open-mindedly to it. It is related to Epistemology, the study of nature and limits of knowledge. Philosophical thinking in this area is nothing without questioning of how we acquire our knowledge and its innateness and if reasoning is enough without experience. I need those to rely on my knowledge for correct reasoning. Alongside, I also need to determine the scope and limits of my knowledge. Otherwise, I am unsure of what I really know.
Gotthold Lessing subjected Philosophy in rational scrutiny as it is an everlasting spiritual journey that seeks for truth and centered in argument. The debates and dialogues manifested by our philosophers were evident by the legacy of questioning the assumption of others to gain deeper understanding and elicit fundamental truths. Thus, it paved way to presentation of ideas and counter-arguments rather simple statements of reasoning and conclusion. I must keep in mind that philosophical ideas are only a small part of a philosopher’s thinking as the conclusion to a longer line of reasoning.
Bertrand Russell stated that the significance of Philosophy is in what it does for the personcwho studies it. Knowledge through criticism is primaly aimed by Philosophy that enables to unify the unity and system to body of Sciences. Knowing logic that emerged from reasoning, it has an intimate connection with Science that work through a series of steps to conclusion. A back-and-forth relationship between Science and Philosophy was established with ideas from one informing the other. The development of logical thinking relies on systematic observation to explain the world which is scientific method. However, what made Philosophy intriguing is with its uncertainty worth arguing for. The paradoxical theories and counter-intuitive statements are the ideas that really call into question my assumptions about myself and the world making me think in new ways about how I see things.
In conclusion, these 3 philosophers briefly demonstrated that Philosophy doesn’t revolvecaround ideas, it’s a way of thinking. As the philosophers come to radically different conclusion into their investigations that science cannot answer and religion doesn’t explain, there are no right or wrong answers. Above all, I don’t attain satisfaction from the ideas and beliefs that are handed upon me by the tradition and culture by the societal teachers and religion, or even philosophers but to be satisfied is through my own individual reasoning. The encouragement to disagree and criticize is as a means to refine me provokes more discussions and prompted yet more ideas. My sense of wonder is still the one driving me to sought explanations, after all.
