DO YOU DISCOVER PHILOSOPHY NOW ?

The big difference between "I learn to think" and "I know"

Some excerpts from the first pages from the GR book "The Global Ethic of Inner Orientation (with eternal values and in conjunction with thinking)". Subtitle: Human fantasies and lies without self -knowledge. (From the pages 28 - 31, ©2014)

Many theoretical solutions, right answers and observations, which today many people ignore and have a hurriedly formed view, will find them in the world history of philosophy. We will undoubtedly enhance our logical thinking by reading some older philosophical works and especially from ancient Greek philosophy. A large number of world prejudices, stupid views and fantasies will be recognized. But the right observations and many correct solutions are scattered and confused with different issues. An overview of the past of philosophical thought and especially in its successful moments will need a large number of pages and here this retrospective will not be included. We have to at least reiterate and emphasize this recording of valuable observations and the contribution to human thought by many other thinkers and philosophers. Especially to all those who are unaware that many issues have been defined and prepared for a comprehensive answer, subversive for many fantasies that are still reproduced and disseminated.

The view that philosophy as a literary work is not a source of valid knowledge, unlike science, is a view that is promoted and has prevailed. It has been prevalent that the writers of philosophical views disagree with each other with a lot of imagination, without ending up the answers of the issues they raise. Just a brief view of what philosophy is and what it offers in our lives, for which if we do not think creatively, then we will fall into the trap of a bad appreciation, or we will draw wrong conclusions! Those who express this view have not realized the big difference between "I learn to think" and "I know". If the views we find in any book had been formulated with the consistency and accuracy of mathematics from beginning to end, then one mistake would probably be enough to annihilate the credibility of all thoughts. But the advantage of mathematics is not always needed. We look for information and some answers, without knowing exactly how we will find them. We simply want to express our observations, questions, instructions, assumptions, regardless of whether the separate views and suggestions can be appreciated correct, incorrect or incomplete. When we find mistakes, omissions, jumps and ambiguity in carefully formulated thoughts, they do not cancel all the views and observations expressed.

Philosophical thoughts are usually not a collection of information and a mere recording of views or external events, no matter how useful or correctly appreciated of their author. They do not have the sole purpose of transmitting credible knowledge, such as a dictionary or a scientific book, or to be applied as information for exactly a particular external result. The view that philosophy is only thoughts that do not belong to science or thoughts that bring us out of reality would be reckless, if not deceitful, when even this meaning of reality is not as obvious as we would like. Like, it would be a barrier to thinking if we said, that a qualified researcher does not need to learn about other fields of the research and imagine. Therefore, the most useful of reading a book and our acquaintance with philosophy is not to learn the story of thoughts. The purpose is to train a creative spirit, not to think only with a relationship of trust in the sources of our information and to reassess our own views, if not to begin our own research.

From the time someone thinks, the danger of contestation begins. Contestation and doubt are usually not pleasant moments because then habits, reckless views, some experiences that have been overly appreciated can be overthrown. Then some of the views with which we coordinate our action and expect some results and rewards can be changed. The challenge is unpleasant and causes problems, cracks in trust and insecurity. More strongly unhappy those who had an excessive confidence in their knowledge and mental abilities. The consequences of challenge can affect cooperation relationships, professional opportunities and some ambitions. When we do not think, when we always agree, when we always say "yes" and trust, so we are good, disciplined and if necessary we are executive bodies of those we trust. If we think more, then we will doubt more, we will be protected from hasty estimates and many "experts" will be more easily and more often questioned. In philosophy, research is done up to the other end to question the credibility of the senses and whether there is a reality or is someone dreaming. Therefore, philosophy is also a spiritual force of questioning and exploring credibility. So it is not a disadvantage and pointless for a human spirit to philosophize or generally think creatively, with restrained certainty and prepared for errors from inadequacy in knowledge.

The difference between "I learn to think" and "I know" is bigger than we imagine. Much that we have learned after persistent effort (eg earlier computer books) are unnecessary and lost time, and we could have prepared intellect and seek and utilize knowledge when it will be needed. We carry knowledge, like a man who turns half his home into a warehouse with more tools, which may never be needed or so rare that they will prove defective or we are clumsy users and would be preferable to pay a craftsman. So if, we do not find an edge (ultimate answers) from the inner/spiritual search and the study of philosophy, then with the word "edge" in thought we must say more clearly what we mean, because this expression is reminiscent of philosophy! (...)

Even the closest thing we see is not known enough as we initially appreciate with thoughts about its utility and the world is not exactly as it appears in our eyes: These are two findings of the most necessary knowledge (spiritual supplies) so much for Research of the world, as well as to regulate our lives. Almost all those who persistently thought about the beginning and substance of the world here agreed. In addition, we find possible solutions to timeless questions and discover questions that need to be answered before the final answers, which we are looking for without patience. We will have good luck and it is especially important if we know, at least one number of possible answers about some timeless questions that are considered unanswered, and that one of the possible solutions is likely to be right, instead of ignoring the possible solutions and questions completely! This offer of philosophy as a spiritual work, as a discussion and as theoretical research is not insignificant. Should the spiritual gain be the brief answer we will read in an encyclopedia and our certainty come from the credibility of the source of the text? By the same logic we would claim to find an "edge" in the evolution of life, that is, all people to be gods and we should wonder because they need so many developments and weaknesses! Note this excerpt by Henri Bergson (1859-1941): "We could ever doubt the absolute value of our knowledge, if the philosophy did not show us what contradictions our logic is stumbling, in what impasses it concludes"?

Many times the "edge" and the correct answer in theoretical thought can be considered to be "proof" but when proof is missing, that does not mean that knowledge is missing. And when knowledge is missing, opinions are still formed, which are not all right with the same probability and we still have intellect that needs to be creative and inventive. Still, it is not unlikely that the knowledge and solution of a problem have been lost in some lines in an unknown and forgotten book, even in a scholarly work that did not fall into the hands of an interested professor. Some thoughts and solutions may not have drawn the attention of a prepared creator. Many useful views, correct and valuable observations are not found in the limited number of pages of available books that are recognized for their credibility.