Expertise and ignorance. Part 1.

Pondering the Postmodern question: Are the only philosophical options expertise, ignorance and deferment?

It’s bizarre how I get so many visitors that read various posts and hardly anyone ever comments. I am increasing followers almost one per day maybe like three a week on average, And hardly anyone ever comments.

Anyways, I figured I would probably get the response that you gave….

“For the ancient Greeks, philosophy was an autonomous rational quest for an ethical life. So it was not that complicated like it is today in some philosophical schools.
Philosophy is criticism and freedom of thoughts to create concepts that tells the present and can predict the future. An example of concept would be: consumerism. It tells us what it is on different scales: social, economical, political and their impact on people etc.. Consumerism as a rational crafted concept predicted decades ago our future: catastrophes, climate change, collective anxiety, financial crisis etc..
I believe this is the definition and role of philosophy: creation of concepts that tell our present and predict our future. Philosophy doesn’t serve anything or anyone and shouldn’t be the voice of politics or any system. Somehow, it should try to dismantle the systems in order to make a better life…Again we go back to the Greeks. Presocratic philosophers were a bunch of people trying to understand the unique principle of existence. Some said it was water, others said it was fire etc…”
—from Maylynno’s reply on my previous post on The Beginning of Philosophy


Because anyone if everyone knows in the west it was the ancient Greeks. But I was, I am also always looking for just any response, any ideas. Nevertheless, I figure it comes down to two beginnings: The one like you gave us that looks in the history as though I am a human being that grew up as a child that gained intelligence that gained a capacity of thinking and interests, Who then started reading philosophers and attempting to engage with what they have said, and then stemming all the way back to the Greeks or various philosophers in history of various cultures. And then the other one that ponders the fact that I might be able to come upon those philosophical writings. But I was hoping to get other ideas…anyways…

I was hoping I would at least get a small variety of answers. But it’s crazy how no one really wants to discuss anything, or, only want to discuss what they already know. I’m beginning to wonder if blogging is really worth anything larger than watching Netflix. 👽. I ponder that many people might feel unqualified even while they are interested….

Curiosity is a quality that our society discourages.

I wonder what could happen if people asked questions Becuase they didn’t know something, and then those who might know answered, and then were also questioned again, who then admitted what they didn’t know and asked someone else what they knew. Sounds like blogging could be a great learning tool!

– That’s totally absurd!! Who would want to do that??


On another note;

LiteralQa/aly, I do not know one single person, except maybe two or three other people through this blog, who will stick their pinky toe even into the waters of philosophical discussion. None of my few non-web friends, including my wife, have any interest at all in discussing philosophy, and the one who does really might just does so as “what if” Philosophy, and it usually turns into me kind of talking about things I know, and him kind of admitting that he doesn’t know very much about philosophy.

It’s kind of ridiculous. we live in such a compartmentalized Existence, no wonder everyone is either strung out on drugs depressed or super anxious .

Its like were born into a world that tells us that we are invalid and wrong, and we don’t know any better because no one tells us any differently. Seriously.

But that is not the issue that is most annoying.

A coworker of mine stumbled on a little piece of philosophy writing I did at work, and was super excited that I was into philosophy and that I had a blog and so she was into it and decided to go check my blog out. And then like the next time I see her I ask her what she thought about it, and she said that it was way too high philosophy for her to even comprehend. That was those couple posts that I was putting about critical theory and philosophy (A few posts ago) And she told me that she had to follow one of the links to read about what critical theory could be and I basically took that as her being embarrassed because her mind does not work at that kind of critical theory kind of philosophy kind of level, I guess. It wasn’t an awkward moment as much as I could just understand that she understands that she has no context by which to understand what I’m talking about on my blog, and so feels she has to study up. Ok. I get it. But it is still frustrating. But someone being overwhelmed with a discourse that I swim in easily is not what is annoying;

Of course my point is that you don’t have to have any sort of pre-understanding of what is being written about if you just read what Is there without the idea pre-loaded that It is something that takes years and years of study to understand. Basically start small. And what I mean by this is start with what you already know in so much as you question what you are coming upon. The jargon will come…

At least, that is how I want to approach philosophy, that is how I approach writing things. And, that is why I want people to read what I write and then give me feedback because I don’t really know whether or not I’m communicating these simple ideas in a simple way unless I get people to comment.

And I have no way to exercise my ideas and less I have people commenting upon them who have ideas and critiques that I may not have even thought of. And I could be wrong ! That’s the greatest part about getting fresh minds in. Not just the “I know all the issues” people.

So. I’m selfish. Lol

the thing is, I would rather have comments from people who don’t understand what im writing about, over the people that would discount what I’m writing about with reference to the thousands of years of authors and philosophers who have already written about. Sure, it’s great to get into a discussion in the context of what other people might think or what other people might have written, but comments from that angle is also required (see part 2).

OK; it looks like there’s going to be a second part.

In short, After these next few posts, I am going to try and write a post in such a way that if someone who is reasonably intelligent, but who is not privy to all the jargon hoopla, would read it, they would understand probably most of what philosophers had written for the past 2500+ years.

Or at least they will be the able to understand the context of my opinion on those many philosophical writings.

Vent over. 🏜

Author: landzek

My name is Lance Kair, a philosopher, a counselor and a musician who is being questioned.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s