How flexible should philosophy be?

[Philosophy Explorer]

Should philosophy adapt to circumstances or should circumstances adapt to philosophy?

PhilX

[Veritas Aequitas]

It is claimed there are as many definitions of 'philosophy' as the number of people who attempt to define 'philosophy'. At present the common definition and understanding of what is 'philosophy' is confined to the bastardized version as in academic philosophy.

Personally I will define philosophy back to its roots, i.e. 'wisdom.'
I believe there is an inherent impulse and drive, like breathing, sex, and other primal instincts, for knowledge-wisdom within the brain/mind a person [in co-operation with others].

The drive for knowledge specifically is Science [to know] and the impulse for knowledge-wisdom [philosophy] is the process of searching and putting knowledge to optimal use for well being of the individual and the collective.

Since philosophy is an inherent impulse like breathing, sex, etc. this would be philosophy as substance [nature] but it also has its forms [nurture].
We cannot expect natural circumstance to conform to philosophy [as substance] but all philosophy as forms must conform to the philosophy as substance.

Note the failure of the Logical Positivists who tried to force 'circumstances' to conform to their specific philosophy because they were ignorant and did not differentiate between the substance of philosophy and the forms of philosophy.

[surreptitious57]

Philosophy is about asking the right questions but without providing answers to them so the only time for adaptation
is when those questions have been answered in other disciplines or new questions come up that cannot be answered