Sommes-nous tous des philosophes?

Avant de tenter répondre à cette question, il est nécessaire de définir ce qu’est un philosophe. En effet, l’étymologie de ce mot grec signifie amour du savoir ou encore amour de la sagesse. Le philosophe est donc un amoureux en quête de connaissance.

Plus précisément, un philosophe pose des questions et essaie de chercher des vérités, mais souvent ces interrogations restent sans réponses. Nous pouvons ainsi dire que nous sommes tous philosophes puisque, enfants, nous posions des questions telles que « combien y-a-t-il d’étoiles dans le ciel ? ». Karl Jaspers n’affirmait-il pas que « faire de la philosophie, c’est être en route ; les questions en philosophie sont plus essentielles que les réponses » ? Peut-être le philosophe n’est-il pas intéressé par la réponse en elle-même, mais peut-être est-il plus intéressé par le cheminement qui conduit à la conclusion logique de sa question ?

Durant notre café philo nous avons discerné 3 types de philosophes : Ceux qui cherchent la vérité dans la nature, ceux qui cherchent à raisonner (ou à induire une moralité) dans les phénomènes sociaux et dans nos vies quotidiennes, ou encore ceux qui prennent les choses de manière philosophique, en d’autres mots, qui, blasés du tohu-bohu des trivialités mondaines, cherchent refuge dans la spiritualité (« La philosophie sert d’antidote à la tristesse. […] », Emil Michel Cioran)

Peut-on dire alors que le prêtre est-il un philosophe ? La réponse semble être négative parce qu’il a déjà les réponses à chacune de ses questions : c’est la bible ou les écritures saintes qui apportent les solutions a toutes ses interrogations ; il n’a pas besoin de chercher la vérité ailleurs. Et le politicien ? Chaque parti se base toujours sur une philosophie pour justifier ses actions. Le banquier ? La « philosophie » des bonus auto-générés comme motivation afin de créer encore plus de richesse pour la société lui permet de s’enrichir encore plus. Quant à l’artiste, alors que le philosophe cherche des réponses rationnelles à ses questions, lui crée des œuvres imaginaires en explorant la partie irrationnelle de son psyché. Pierre Baillargeon renchéri sur cette opinion en ajoutant que « le philosophe recherche la vérité, l’artiste, la beauté ». Cependant, dans l’art moderne ou post-moderne, l’art qualifié de « conceptuel », vise à faire de l’art une déclaration philosophique dénuée d’éléments émotionnels et irrationnels souvent présents dans l’art romantique. L’art moderne représente une cassure délibérée avec le romantisme et l’impressionnisme. Très philosophiquement, nous pouvons conclure notre réflexion par cette pensée d’Aristote qui déclare que « Le philosophe est celui qui possède la totalité du savoir dans la mesure du possible. »

道 - Introduction to Taoism

Topic of yesterday: “ce qui est le philosophe” – what is philosopher.  First, we have to ask what is philosophy? According to its Greek origin, the word is a combination of philo (love) and sophy (knowledge) “Love of knowledge”. Therefore a philosopher is a "lover of knowledge."
Blandine, one of our café-philosophers who has studied Chinese for some years, made the observation that some philosophical concepts could be more easily expressed picturesquely in written Chinese. It took me some time to understand this remark and make sense of her comment. After some contemplation, I came to the conclusion that the concept of Chinese philosophy differs from what you would normally classify as the “love of knowledge”. Philosophy in ancient China could be more accurately associated with the German phrase die Weltanschauung or “world view”.

Take Taoism for example, as a branch of philosophy, it represents a view of nature and recommends a life style in harmony with nature rather than seeking the truth or knowledge.

In most philosophical schools, we ask ourselves three questions:

To be, to have, or to do? - Who are we? Why do we exist? What is the purpose? Descartes’ famous line: “je pense donc je suis” – “I think therefore I am” stresses the question of “to be” and “to do”.

In Taoism, we can examine the following words:

道 (Dao, or Tao) – path, way, nature

氣 (Qi, or Chi) – breathing, air, to be alive, to be

無 (Wu) – to have not; without

爲 (Wei) – action, to do

One of the most important concepts of Taoism is expressed as: 無爲 Wu Wei. The literal meaning of Wu Wei is “have no action” – in other words, “Do nothing!” The aim of Wu Wei is to achieve a state of perfect equilibrium, or alignment with the 道 Dao (or Tao) – in harmony with the path of nature, and, as a result, obtain an irresistible form of "soft and invisible" power.

The Taoist sage Laozi (ca.400 BC), who lived a non-material existence like Siddhartha, demonstrated the concept of Wu Wei by introducing 氣功 Qi Gong (or Chi kong) – breathing exercises - meditative training increasing longevity and as means of accessing higher realms of existence.

In Western society, some people justify their existence by accumulating unbridled wealth (investment banker’s philosophy). Some people aim to make their life meaningful by seeking fame (“Reality Show” contestant’s philosophy). Some people seek to “make history” by waging wars in the world (politician’s philosophy). Interestingly, there are also people in the West who are sick of a modern society which advocates blind pursuit of money and power. They prefer to live as hermits enjoying their own company. By detaching from society with its demands for conformity, they seek to achieve an inner peace. This kind of life-style is not very far from the Taoist concept of Wu Wei.

Notes:
子 - Zi or Tsu - archaic meaning: "Master", or "Sir". (modern meaning: “son”, “child”)

孔子 - Kongzi – founder of Confucianism (551-479 BC)

老子 - Laozi - Taoist sage (c.400 BC)

孫子 – Sunzi - Military strategist and philosopher (c.544-496 BC)

老子 Laozi

Choice and Future

Dear Philosophers,

You have probably made resolutions for the New Year. We all do, or we ought to. Resolutions manifest that we take our happiness seriously and stir our lives in the direction we choose rather than allow it to drift aimlessly. Is it a choice, though? Our personal stories appear as series of crossroads, from which paths opened up, and we went down this one and that one, not knowing where they ultimately led and forfeiting the opportunities that the other destinations might have offered. Because no map shows the journeys ends, and our bodies, our education, our circumstances restrict our possibilities, many thinkers claim we didnt choose. We lacked the necessary information. Our decisions were the mechanical results of a concatenation of previous events and social constraints.

It is a rather incoherent way of reading our lives narratives, is it not? The only information we would need to make secure life choices is knowledge of the future, and that will forever be lacking. In the Hassidic tradition the past is spatially represented in front of the subject, where she can see it; the future is in her back, invisible an accurate depiction of our human condition. If the future were knowable, we would not be making choices; we would let ourselves be unfailingly guided by our interest.

And the reason we can make choices at all is because our possibilities are restricted. Imagine that out of the blue a voice commanded you Choose! Your reaction would be: between what? Tea or coffee? Stay or leave? Hang on or dump my partner? Chamonix or the Maldives? Take the job or keep searching? The blue one or the red one? Without a given historical context decisions are impossible. There must be a menu for us to choose from. So the issue is not whether we make choices, but rather that certain menus are less palatable than we would like. It may be the consequence of wrong turns at previous crossroads, or physical and social limitations, but, however restricted, choices still are possible.

Lets choose the right resolutions for the New Year. It is about our happiness, after all.

Christian