Be Your Own Person —Be a Philosopher 做自己——成为哲学家_

Be Your Own Person —Be a Philosopher 做自己——成为哲学家

作者：C. H.古德温

来源：《英语世界》2020年第05期

The immediate reaction of some sharp， informed readers with a particular philosophical

background to the heading of this article will be a denial of any necessary， logical relationship

between becoming an autonomous person and being a philosopher. They will say philosophy is

concerned with the meaning of meaning， and not with providing a framework of beliefs and values

by which to live.

As one professional philosopher has put it， “Philosophy… is above all concerned with the

clarification of the concepts and propositions through which our experience and activities are

intelligible…philosophy is not a speculative super-science that tries to answer questions about some

ultimate reality; it is not the pursuit of moral knowledge; it is not the integrator of all human

understanding into a unified view of man， God and the universe…”

The heading of this article， however， is based upon the popular understanding of the word

“philosophy” as indicating a person’s basic attitudes towards life in general. W.F. Deedes1 can speak

of “the private philosophy that we all have tucked away inside us somewhere”; to which we can turn

for inner strength in times of great stress. It can also be used to denote an approach towards a

particular activity. Thus the wise， old deputy-head of the first primary school in which I taught

advised me， “The best thing you can do in this profession is to make up your own philosophy and

stick to it.” The wise teacher， therefore， is his own person with his own philosophy of education！

He has his own distinctive way of educating children based on what he thinks is of value.

The more I pondered the words of the deputy-head the more I realized they implied three

important things about the nature of philosophy. They implied philosophy was： a highly personal，

distinctive activity; a testimony to the kind of person we are since it expresses our basic values and

beliefs; a consciously articulated and coherent system of beliefs and values informing and guiding our

conduct as individuals.

The academic philosophers I was conversant with at the time claimed to stand within the historic

tradition of the great philosophers of the past which they seemed to date back to Socrates. One of them

said， “What distinguishes the philosopher is the type of second-order questions which he asks. These

are basically the same questions asked by Socrates at the beginning—the questions ‘What do you

mean？’ and ‘How do you know？’” I was familiar with Plato’s accounts of Socrates philosophical

activity in his dialogues The Republic and The Phaedrus， and extended my knowledge to include

some of Plato’s other works. To my relief I discovered that the three characteristics of philosophy I

had identified in the deputy-head’s advice were also present in Socrates.

Philosophy was a highly distinctive activity for Socrates. He became dissatisfied with the

science of his day because it failed to throw light on what he chiefly wanted to know by its insistence

on explaining everything mechanistically. So， says one scholar， Socrates， “turned his back on all

such speculations and resolved to work out a new method for himself.”

Socrates philosophy revealed what kind of person he was; Socrates was a deeply religious man.

He devised his own method of philosophical enquiry in response to the divine oracle of Delphi which

declared him to be the wisest man in Greece. Philosophy became for Socrates the means of

discovering his own ignorance. As he said in his defence to the citizens of Athens， “the truth

probably is， citizens， that it is God who is really wise， and that he means in this oracle to say that

human wisdom is worth little or nothing.”

Philosophy informed and guided the conduct of Socrates. He also said in his defence to the

citizens of Athens， “the greatest good to man is to discourse daily about virtue and those other

matters about which you have heard me speak and examine both myself and others， and that a life

without examination is not worth living.”

Is it legitimate to claim that one can be one’s own person， and that the most rewarding way of

attaining independent selfhood is through the practice of philosophy？ Is it possible to be a

philosopher at all without proper training in the subject？ R.G. Collingwood2 said， “Anyone who

thinks， and is determined to let nothing stop him from thinking is philosopher…” Other professional

philosophers disagree. It is not enough to be a thoughtful person. All too often， when people first

begin to reflect upon their experience， their thoughts are confused， contradictory and inconsistent.

This is because they tend to pursue their reflections without much method and without a clear

understanding of what constitutes a valid chain of reasoning.

One can play football without having to be a professional footballer. One can think without

having a knowledge of logic. It may be uninformed， undisciplined， and emotionally clouded by

one’s prejudices but even professional philosophers with all their sophisticated methods of analysis

and reasoning despair of reaching final， incontrovertible conclusions. A. J. Ayer once wrote， “In

philosophy one never quite knows where one is， one never quite knows when one has got a problem

solved—whether one has got the problem properly posed. This I think makes one despair at times，

but then one goes on， and perhaps one gets something one thinks may be right， and then one feels

better again.”

Philosophy was a highly distinctive activity for Socrates. He became dissatisfied with the

science of his day because it failed to throw light on what he chiefly wanted to know by its insistence

on explaining everything mechanistically. So， says one scholar， Socrates， “turned his back on all

such speculations and resolved to work out a new method for himself.”

Socrates philosophy revealed what kind of person he was; Socrates was a deeply religious man.

He devised his own method of philosophical enquiry in response to the divine oracle of Delphi which

declared him to be the wisest man in Greece. Philosophy became for Socrates the means of

discovering his own ignorance. As he said in his defence to the citizens of Athens， “the truth

probably is， citizens， that it is God who is really wise， and that he means in this oracle to say that

human wisdom is worth little or nothing.”

Philosophy informed and guided the conduct of Socrates. He also said in his defence to the

citizens of Athens， “the greatest good to man is to discourse daily about virtue and those other

matters about which you have heard me speak and examine both myself and others， and that a life

without examination is not worth living.”

Is it legitimate to claim that one can be one’s own person， and that the most rewarding way of

attaining independent selfhood is through the practice of philosophy？ Is it possible to be a

philosopher at all without proper training in the subject？ R.G. Collingwood2 said， “Anyone who

thinks， and is determined to let nothing stop him from thinking is philosopher…” Other professional

philosophers disagree. It is not enough to be a thoughtful person. All too often， when people first

begin to reflect upon their experience， their thoughts are confused， contradictory and inconsistent.

This is because they tend to pursue their reflections without much method and without a clear

understanding of what constitutes a valid chain of reasoning.

One can play football without having to be a professional footballer. One can think without

having a knowledge of logic. It may be uninformed， undisciplined， and emotionally clouded by

one’s prejudices but even professional philosophers with all their sophisticated methods of analysis

and reasoning despair of reaching final， incontrovertible conclusions. A. J. Ayer once wrote， “In

philosophy one never quite knows where one is， one never quite knows when one has got a problem

solved—whether one has got the problem properly posed. This I think makes one despair at times，

but then one goes on， and perhaps one gets something one thinks may be right， and then one feels

better again.”