creativesoul wrote:Philosophy is a disciplined method of identifying, cataloguing, ordering, and assessing thought/belief and statements thereof. Done right, it is a beautiful thing to behold.
It can just as well become a method of challenging, upsetting or falsifying a self-congratulating position taken by some.
There are many examples in history where philosophy (or theology) fulfilled a revolutionary role. And it would be
extremely philosophical to also question the cataloguing and ordering itself (e.g. Nietzsche). For example, it could question utilitarianism or any idea on progress, development and meaning itself. Therefore philosophy is the ultimately useless (or "beyond-use-useless") thing as it cannot be either useful or useless to be able to ask the questions. For that reason even "proper" identification and cataloguing is only philosophical
in as far this enables a proper, "self-aware" (folded back to itself) exchange. Any resulting catalogue would be historical in nature and merely tools for historians of philosophy. This reasoning could lead to boiling down philosophy to a "spirit" more than a discipline or a science. Some restless, questioning spirit but not a rule book since it could just as easily create rules and laws as dismiss them when the time has come.
Philosophy could perhaps be described as being equal a certain essential aspect of mind itself and not its resulting forms or actions. However, this assessment could never philosophically proven or put inside some tradition or framework. It's more like axiomatic truth: one can start from it or dismiss it as useless tautology or self-indulgence. But even that personal determination, no matter the conclusion, would still be that very restless spirit.