Our Responsibility to the Natural Philosophers

Some people are natural philosophers. The very first time that they are exposed to philosophical thinking it explodes in their brain like a bomb going off. Not only do they see that philosophers question basic assumptions and try to get to the bottom of things. They also instinctively want to try to do it themselves. With very few exceptions we professional philosophers are people like this and so should be able to understand what it is like to go through this again for the first time.

Being a natural philosopher causes lots of problems for people. For one thing it is very exciting and more than a little addictive. Once you start you want to do it all the time. At first it interferes with your relationships with people who are not natural philosophers--they think you are being more than a little tedious and argumentative. And you, for your part, are astonished that everyone isn't just as fascinated by these ideas as you are. So relationships can suffer at least at first. Second, philosophy seems to give you a God's eye view of things. It can cause an ego to swell rapidly to enormous proportions. Thinking about things from this angle can make one feel infinitely superior to the common rabble who are immersed in ordinary life. This is potentially very dangerous and harmful to people. How do we communicate to those we have "infected" with philosophy that it does not mean that they are better than other people? Finally, I worry about those who graduate with degrees in philosophy and are clearly addicted but are not going to make careers as professional philosophers. Honestly only a very tiny percentage of our majors will be professors some day. But a substantial percentage of our majors are addicted to philosophy and will have a hard time adjusting to a world where they won't get their daily philosophy fix! What do we do for these addicts to prepare them to adjust to the "real world."

Have others thought about these issues? Do you have helpful ideas to share?

Quaker Philosophy Roundtable

The following questions were raised at the most recent meeting of Friends Association for Higher Education as part of a roundtable discussion about what it means to be a Quaker and a philosopher and how these things intersect with issues facing Quakers (i.e., Peace, Justice, and Sustainability). As one participant put it, all three days of the conference could have been spent on these questions; because of the interest in and complexity of these questions, this blog has been started in order to foster an ongoing discussion.These questions are intended to be a starting point, rather than boundaries around discussion.

• How do we, as philosophers, each see ourselves as "scholars for peace, justice, or sustainability"?
• What is it that you are trying to accomplish in your teaching, in your research, and in your service?
• What is philosophy, anyway?
• Is it the task of philosophy to connect with real world problems, or not?
• How do you see your primary identity? Quaker? Philosopher? Quaker-Philosopher? Teacher? Scholar? Something else?
• Do you ever find your Quaker identity in conflict with (or in tension with) your academic-philosophy identity? How do you respond to these situations?
• Is there something that could be called "Quaker Philosophy"?
• Do Quakers have anything distinctive to offer to academic philosophy?

Anyone is welcome to reply, but we hope others will join this blog in order to write at greater length.