Our study her has an ambitious aim. In this course it is intended to explore philosophical inquiry into methods and approaches and problems therewith.
Despite many conscious attempts to "reflect" upon the problems involving in the methods in the history of the Western philosophy, there have been very few opera which intend to accomplish the same task as we impose upon ourself. Of course, this alone does not justify why we search for the methodology of philosophy. Nevertheless such a situation indubitably reveals that this area of philosophical inquiry has been neglected in the history of the Western philosophy. The situation of the methodological inquiry in philosophy in the other culture finds itself quite similarly. Therefore, it appears even more urgent that we pursue the philosophical inquiry into its own methods systematically, so we shall be able to contribute to discovering one's own direction in the philosophical research..
Of course, however, we must recognize that methodological inquiry in and by itself is meaningless, divorced from the actual question in philosophy. A method is solely and exclusively meaningful and unavoidable in any pursuit of knowledge as the means to that knowledge, but it cannot be intrinsic in abstracto. Once, at the turning of the 20th century, it was quite fashionable to talk about "methodology" per se and some of those philosophers who believed this decided to make philosophical inquiry only as the inquiry of the methodology of the natural science. This is also an explicit warning against some of the major approaches in the so-called post-modern philosophy which are currently fashionable in France and other countries. In the similar vein, the so-called philosophy of language per se or divorced from the actual use shall be an object of radically critical appraisal later.
Some philosophers may maintain that the method in philosophy is what we call "logic." Max Scheler, the great soul who was active the first half of this century in Germany, considered so and contrasted two logical method, namely "deduction" and "induction" with the "phenomenological reduction" or the "phenomenological epoché." According to Max Scheler, the method is a special tool, by means of which one can pursue an inquiry in philosophy. On the other hand, what we call the phenomenological reduction or epoché is the modification of our basic attitude toward the world in such that by performing the phenomenological reduction, we neutralize the "power" by which a real object is experienced as "real." By performing the phenomenological reduction, we are freed from the commitment to the reality of the object (or more generally of the world at large) of our experience. Thus, being withheld from being immersed in the "faith" in reality of the world, we are able to "reflect" upon the way in which we know and experience the world.
This use of the term, method in philosophy, is indeed rather traditional and in a very narrow sense. In fact Aristotle, as will be discussed later, held that logical inferences as the methods in philosophy. As mentioned later, Aristotle was quite ambiguous in the role of logic and logical investigation. On the one hand, he considered that logic could not be a serious discipline to be pursued, but a portion of the "general education." On the other hand, Aristotle made a great deal of his effort to investigate logical problems and wrote three opera, categories, analytica priora, analytica posteriora. The editor of Aristotle's opera call these three the organon as constituting the great domain of Aristotle's inquiry into the problem of philosophical methods. Thus, briefly considered, we may concluded that Aristotle was the father or the first philosopher who had an explicit consciousness about the pursuit of investigation into philosophical methodology.
Before we get involved in the philosophical inquiry into methods in philosophy, it may be appropriate to pay an attention first to the question of what we do in philosophy and how a philosophical inquiry is given. Without a proper understanding of what philosophy is all about, we may fail to behold the proper domain of our investigation.
§ 1-1. What do we do in philosophy and how is a philosophical inquiry is given?
As the etymological study later in the next paragraph shows, It was the Greek that conceived and created the world "philosophy." According to this original meaning, philosophy is nothing but the or pursuit or search for wisdom or knowledge. Any intellectual pursuit to discover and own true knowledge may be understood by "philosophy." Indeed, it was right that philosophy meant precisely the love of wisdom.
As Diotima, the mythological figure, whom Socrates in Plato's Symposium quoted, properly described, Love (Erws) was begotten secretly by Poverty (Penia) with Plenty (Poros) who fell asleep at the party held by gods when Aphrodite was born. It is thus neither plenty, nor poor in His being. Since Love was born on the beautiful Aphrodite birthday, he loves beauty. Due to his fate, Love is always poor (due to being his mother's son), dwelling with want. From his father, Love inherited bravery, strength, was a good hunter, and a searcher of wisdom, that is a philosopher. He was able to recognize where those good things including wisdom lie and to be able to search for them.
Philosophy as love of wisdom (or search for knowledge) is an activity, not an established bulk of knowledge or information we might discover in front of us or might be able to obtain. Due to the consequences of the past philosophers' activities, we tend to believe that philosophy like a modern science is a system of information. On the contrary, It is the very act and maintenance of the search and indeed of the search for truth. From this it is obvious that philosophy as the search for knowledge (love of wisdom) is indeed underlying any intellectual pursuit of knowledge in whatever the field it may be.
It is a total misconception that we will be able to find philosophy in an opus written by a famous philosopher. Indeed, we are strongly encouraged to study such an opus, but we will never be able to attain the perpetual activity of philosophical inquiry by doing so. Certainly we will be able to discover and learn, if we would like to do so, how to philosophize, how to formulate questions, how to develop one's own method. Therefore, whether or not philosophy is properly given is a matter of one's own attitude to discover and properly disclose and digest how to philosophize. In this sense, philosophy must be learned again and again and again.
§ 1-2.Different uses of the term "Philosophy."
If we thematically look at our own experience, it is obvious that the concept of philosophy was not a special name for the knowledge obtained by a scientific inquiry, but it has many other uses and meanings in our mundane experience. It may be of significance to study these different uses of the concept of philosophy and stipulate the authentic sense of philosophy and philosophical inquiry, although from the beginning of this lecture, we are expected to know it somehow unthematically.
§ 1-2-1 The Colloquial Mundane Use of the Term Philosophy
We say, for example:
§ 1-2-2 Philosophy in the sense of Natural and Moral Science
In another sense, we use "philosophy" in a different sense, i.e., in a more "scientific" way. Before the so-called particular sciences came into being mutually independent and distinguishable pursuits of knowledge such as physics, chemistry, biology, sociology and psychology, philosophy was considered as signifying a pursuit of knowledge.
Gradually (particularly after the 18th century Europe), however, science means predominantly to be the pursuit of a systematic knowledge of nature for is own sake, which even requires special method, skill and special training for it. In this sense, science later in a sense resembles to the Greek term hé techné (= art).
Thus, in philosophical inquiry, we critically investigate everything. Thereby we attempt to search and attain an awareness of reality as a whole without any preconceived ideas or pre-existing dogmatic beliefs.
The concept, "philosophy," was created by the Ancient Greek. It was originally made of two words, the one was "philo" which meant "to love," while the other was "sophia" that signified "wisdom." According to the History of Western Philosophy, "philosophia" was supposed to be used by Pythagoras, who called himself a "philosopher," when he was asked, "What are you?," according to Diogenes Laërtius' The Lives of Philosophers, Book VIII.
As this episode may not be true, but at least we can perhaps infer from it that by then, the concepts of philosopher and philosophy had at least an acceptance by the intellectuals. Namely by combining these two concepts, "love" and "wisdom" or "knowledge," "philosophia" originally and primarily meant "love of wisdom," that is, "the pursuit of knowledge" in general. In other words, love of wisdom is no other than to pursue wisdom, to inquiry into the nature of thing, and to search for knowledge in general. In this sense, the early Greek philosophers were not only philosophers in today's senses, they were scientists in the genuine sense (the inquiry into the nature of thing).
Let us organize about this etymological situations:
I-i-a) According Diogenes Laërtius' The Lives of Philosophers, Book VIII, Pythagoras was the first one to call himself "'m OlmPmOms" (he philosophos, i.e., a philosopher.
Heracleitus was also known to us through his fragments as the philosopher who also said:
In our mundane experience, this arché or the principle‹Water for Thales‹ (of all things‹all the natural phenomena on earth‹) are not given to us as such, i.e., it is not given as one (principle) but as many (phenomena) in our everydayness.
I-iv) Philosophy as the intellectual activity: Philosophy is not only the obtained or discovered knowledge itself, but also it is primarily the activity, namely the activity to pursue knowledge. It is a state of search from the ignorance to the state of being wise. In order to begin this search, we need to be freed from the preconceived ideas, particularly the self-conceit of one's being wise. This self conceit is, from the point of view of philosophical inquiry, a self deception. Since it is a self deception, it is extremely hard to awake oneself from it. It requires a radical change of one's own attitude and conviction. The Socratic questioning and the Cartesian universal doubt are two most prominent ways of awakening oneself from such a dogmatic slumber. Only when we are awaken to one's own ignorance, we start our questioning search, namely philosophizing.
As the human-being is mortal and finite, it is more desirable and advisable to acknowledge to oneself that such a questioning search may not be complete. Although we have a tendency to believe that what is scientific, is naturally scientifically known is an unshakable truth and will never change, such a misconception of natural science and its knowledge must be made explicit. First of all, scientific knowledge is not only hypothetical (the law of nature has been formulated as a hypothetical statement), which implies that scientific knowledge is indeed conditional, conditional to a certain circumstance, but also scientific knowledge is by nature incomplete. For one of the two most fundamental functions of scientific knowledge is to explain a certain phenomenon which has occurred, and to predict a future occupance of a phenomenon of the same. In order to possess the function of predicting a future event, scientific confirmation cannot be complete. As a corollary to this, scientific knowledge always makes progress. This implies the incompleteness of such a knowledge. Therefore, although in philosophy, no progress is possible in the sense of the natural science, philosophical inquiry may find itself in the form of progress by means of its method.
This will be discussed more in detail later.
"To just enjoy playing, and not to always worry about winning is my philosophy of playing golf."
or
"To secure the long term profit of investors, to maintain the security and benefits of employees, and to contribute to the community is our corporate philosophy."
Even people talk about the philosophy of fashion or that of cosmetic, as Karl Löwith once lamented in his Heidegger, Denker in dürftiger Zeit.
Thus, even in our everyday life, we are quite familiar with the term "philosophy" and we use quite frequently the term in our conversation of everydayness. In this sense, philosophy is used to refer to the principles underlying all the activities, whether it is playing golf, managing a corporation, or creating the basic statement of fashion or cosmetic. These principles have nothing to do with our pursuit of knowledge, nor critical appraisal from the fundamental basis. They can be casually held, believed or expounded, and they can be and yet do not have to even be true at all. They are considered as mere beliefs we hold in order to do those activities.
In this sense, we are familiar with this concept of philosophy. This mundane concept of philosophy is, however, and once again can be the starting point of our inquiry into and returning to the original philosophical concept.
At the European universities in the Middle Ages, there were four disciplines, that is, Philosophy, Theology, Jurisprudence and Medicine (Unfortunately, for example, Dentistry was not considered as a scientific pursuit, but a practical art like stone masonry.) Philosophy was further divided into two divisions, the Moral Philosophy and Natural Philosophy. Therefore, even today, at such traditional institutions as Oxford and Cambridge Universities, there are only two Faculties, Natural Philosophy which covers all the natural sciences and Moral Philosophy which covers all human sciences. This simply means that they have been upholding the tradition of the Medieval European Universities.
Thus, in contrast to Philosophy as the Pure Pursuit of Knowledge, there were Theology (Investigation and Understanding of God), then Medicine (the arts of care of the human body and cures for diseases) and Jurisprudence (the Study of Law to practice it) at the Medieval and Contemporary European Universities (until the middle of the 19th century). They were considered as the subjects which one could study at the graduate school after having completed the study of philosophies.
In this sense, philosophy was used as synonymous with science. To go back to the origin o this concept, what we understand by science goes back to scientia. Furthermore, scientia was a Latin translation of the Greek word, "hé epistémé," which simply meant "knowledge." Namely, in addition to knowledge itself, scientia later also implied the pursuit and love of knowledge.
§ 1-2-3 Knowledge for its own sake: Epistémé (Episthmh) and Practical Skill and Knowledge useful for something else: Techné (Teÿnh)
In fact, Plato used hé techné to refer to some of particular sciences and or arts (dominantly knowledge of particular skill and technic for practical purposes, although "hé techné" sometimes refers to specific knowledge and skills pursued for its own sake, too. Take for example, hé mousiké‹music, poetry, mathematics, and philosophy‹, hé techné politké‹political sciences).
In Aristotle, too, many particular sciences were considered arts, as long as they are pursuits of knowledge not for their own sake, but for usefulness, i.e. instrumentally pursued. When the disciplines are considered to pursue knowledge for their own sake, they are called philosophies.
What we call today Metaphysics was thus not used by Aristotle himself, but he called the area of investigation the Primary Philosophy. Indeed, metaphysics are primarily the piles of Aristotle's lecture note manuscripts next to the lecture notes on Physics, therefore, they were called "Ta Meta Ta Physika." This will be discussed later in more detail.
This distinction of arts and sciences or arts and philosophy were made not only in terms of the value of such knowledge, but also two different approaches or methods. Arts or techné was pursued and developed with the intention of practical application, while philosophy or science was from the beginning the search for knowledge for it own sake, without any specific application or purpose.
§ 1-2-3 Philosophy as Love of Wisdom or Pursuit of Knowledge as Epistémé.
This has been touched before more than once. It is here that we must perhaps systematically elucidate philosophy in this primordial,.authentic sense. As clearly and distinctly different from the two uses of philosophy above (i.e., moral philosophy and natural philosophy), we have another use, which is a more primordial one and this meaning remains in the depth of all philosophical and scientific inquiry as the basic approach and attitude.
Philosophy in this above sense was very likely used in the sense, when Heracleitus primarily spoke of philosophia ‹love of wisdom‹. What did they, the Ancient Greek philosophers, understand by this concept of philosophy?
It was certainly the sense in which later Socrates himself was awakened to the Mission of ripping off the dogmatic slumber (in which the general populace and the youth in particular were). This dogmatic slumber was indeed self conceit and self-deception to take an attitude and think: "We are wise! We know everything!" while in reality they were not wise, but totally ignorant. In order to destroy such a dogmatic slumber of self deception, one cannot be dogmatic, but first of all, one must become doubt and critical of oneself and one's own conceit. Further, through this explicit awareness and self-disclosure of self deception and conceit, it helps those who were awakened to self ignorance and luck of knowledge to do search for and pursuit of knowledge and wisdom. As Heidegger correctly calls philosophy the "questioning search," philo-sophia as the love of wisdom or the pursuit of knowledge possesses thus the following two crucial elements:
Socrates (other than Apology, the others are more Plato's philosophical thought) talked about the nature of philosophy mainly in three dialogues: Apology, Phaedo, and Symposium. The explication of the meaning of philosophy briefly stated above was presented in Apology and Symposium (conf. The above). In Phaedo, philosophy was disclosed as "preparation for death," as all the finite human-beings were trapped in the prison of or imprisoned in the confinement of their bodies. To do search for knowledge is to purify our souls from the senses which blinds and distorts us from knowing reality as it actually is and ready for the separation of the soul from body such that the soul now is fully capable of searching and possessing the genuine, pure knowledge and wisdom.
§ 1-3 The etymological inquiry into "philosophy
I-i) Who was the first who used the word, "'m OlmPmOms" (the philosopher), for the first time? As far as its recorded history is concerned, there are two different philosophers, namely Pythagoras and Heracleitus.
When Leon of Phlius asked Pythagoras what (profession) he was, Pythagoras compared men's activities with the rites of the state (i.e., the Olympic Games) and said that there were people who participated in the games themselves (marathon, wrestling, horse racing, etc.), others came to Olympia to open their shops (to make money), and some others came to see the Games as the audience. The philosophers (lovers of wisdom) are audience or viewers. The human ways of life resembled these: Some pursue profit and wealth and others, to gain their fame (by becoming winners), while the philosophers love truth and wisdom and endeavors to attain wisdom for its own sake.
0-1-ii-a) The first philosopher who used the term philosophy or "OlmPmOlc" for the first time according to Fragments of the Pre-Socratic Philosophers, it was Heracleitus.
Both of these "records" rather clearly indicate that philosophy or pursuit of knowledge is not a personal or even true opinion, but information which can be discussed and confirmed by any one interested in (the logos has also the meaning of what is signified by a word and is to be checked by those people who hear and understand it). That is, the philosopher is the person who pursues the knowledge for its own sake which can be expressed by words and confirmed by those who hear and understand those words. Instead of being "relative" it may be called "universal." We would like to emphasize that knowledge to be pursued in philosophy is neither the kind of personal opinion, nor biased by preconceived ideas.Do not listen to me, but listen to the logos (what is said by word or reason) and agree that all things are one...
0-1-ii) It seems quite true, however, that a somewhat implicit awareness of what the philosopher does and what philosophy is all about must have existed prior to Pythagoras and Heracleitus. Due to the force of the circumstances and the stage of the development of philosophy in Ancient Greece, it was indeed Pythagoras that happened to be forced to be awaken to such an explicit awareness of philosophy and of being a philosopher himself. As long as Aristotle's ideas were accepted, we would say that Thales, the father of Ancient Greek Philosophy, has this idea.
0-1-iii) Identity and Difference between one (principle) and many (phenomena)
Philosophical inquiry or a scientific research intends to discover the one behind all the phenomena and will have an experience of being awakened by and understanding of the knowledge that this one is the ultimate cause or principle of all things.
Nevertheless, this one is not immediately given in our mundane experience. And yet each and every phenomenon reveals itself as an expression or an appearance of this arché or principle. In other words, our everyday experience and its phenomena is not other than and cannot be anything else but our starting point of our philosophical inquiry. Without our mundane experience, there will be no beginning and possible no end of our philosophical pursuit.