2 Answers

  1. In my humble opinion, it is quite possible to give philosophy such a definition.

    But I would like to clarify that philosophy is the previous stage of development of every science. That is, after the appearance of Euclid's geometry as a science, Thales ' philosophical arguments about amber and wool did not “lose weight” at all and “shot” only after several millennia, becoming the science of electronics.

    Read more here.


  2. Philosophy can be considered as an” exercise for the mind ” of Mankind, whose regular classes prepared and made possible the emergence of a new kind of activity – science. Just as art is an “exercise” that also prepared a new kind of activity-philosophy. These three activities are unique, exclusively human activities, and they are distinguished (and united) by one thing: they are useless from the point of view of the survival of the Homo species.

    In fact, in this sense, they are “useless waste of energy”, which is not provided for by nature (in the metaphorical sense of “provided”, of course) and is categorically not peculiar to any other living being (species) on the planet – neither an animal, nor a plant, nor a mosquito – anyone.

    Now think for yourself, has art “lost weight” after the emergence of philosophy as such? … Extrapolate your conclusion to the philosophy-science relationship…

    It's all very simple, different kinds of activities, through which a Person tries to break through the limits of possible experience, expands human reality-beyond the boundaries prescribed by Nature.

    (at the same time, so as not to get up twice, and F. Nietzsche answered the question about the “Superman”)

Leave a Reply