What is philosophy
Philosophy is a torch lit by the power of the mind in the depths of darkness. Those with strong minds will overcome that darkness. Those without strength will not only remain in the dark but will also hinder others from escaping it. This is only half of the problem, or perhaps even less than half. At the very least, we must recognize the burning torch. That alone is an achievement.
A great achievement!
The father of the “Übermensch,” Nietzsche, says: “He who would learn to fly one day must first learn to stand and walk and run and climb and dance; one cannot fly into flying.[1]”
Just as we cannot suddenly light the torch of philosophy, we cannot suddenly become philosophers. For this, we must first feel the spark, want to feel the spark, see it, and be able to distinguish it. We must sense the torch that arises from it, feel its warmth, and move toward its glow. Otherwise, the darkness will swallow us! Perhaps the darkness has already done it. Some have certainly been swallowed. They are simply unaware of it. Some are even unaware of the darkness itself. But that is already an entirely different work.
True philosophy, even science agrees with us, can strengthen the mind. This is its main advantage. Perhaps the only advantage it has 26 centuries after its creation. But this is a subjective opinion. Everyone has the right to disagree – true philosophy says so. Only one condition – this right must be based on logic, science, and observation. It’s that simple. Simplicity is the first requirement of beauty. Simplicity is the first condition of elevation.
“Love,” philos, and “wisdom,” sophia, together form the word “philosophy,” which in Greek means “love of wisdom.” Why Greek? Because it is the work of Greek intellect. It is humanity’s longest, deepest, and most elevated work.
In the History of Western Philosophy Bertrand Russell describes the work of Greek intellect as follows: “Philosophy is something intermediate between theology and science. Like theology, it consists of “Philosophy is something intermediate between theology and science. Like theology, it consists of speculations on matters as to which definite knowledge has, so far, been unascertainable; but like science, it appeals to human reason rather than to authority, whether that of tradition or that of revelation. All definite knowledge—so I should contend—belongs to science; all dogma as to what surpasses definite knowledge belongs to theology. But between theology and science there is a No Man’s Land, exposed to attack from both sides; this No Man’s Land is philosophy.”
We have now understood to some extent what philosophy is. At this point, a question as old as philosophy itself arises: Should a person engage in philosophy? Aristotle says that they should, or perhaps they should not. If they should, the matter is clear. If, however, a person should not engage in philosophy, then they must engage in philosophy to justify why they should not. Therefore, in any case, a person must engage in philosophy[2]. This is Aristotle’s view. It is hard to argue with him.
But the main point, of course, is not this. The main thing is to engage in true philosophy. Because philosophy is thought, it is a way of thinking, even when it is wrong. Therefore, there is philosophy in wrong thinking, just wrong philosophy—philosophy that lacks wisdom. As a result, everyone is a philosopher, some are right, and some are wrong. But wrong is unnecessary. Wrong is not needed by anyone, not even by those who fail to understand this.
So, what is true philosophy? Everyone must find their own answer to this question. How? With the help of philosophy itself, with the help of philosophers. For this, it is essential to know them and follow their philosophies. One must become a philosopher. One must witness the birth of philosophy.
This is a long but fascinating journey. It is not for everyone. This journey takes one from the shores of the Aegean to the edges of the universe, dividing the indivisible and seeing the unseen. Therefore, we must return to the beginning—to the very start. We are compelled to travel through time.
How far back must we go? Only 26 centuries. Because the philosophy we know begins there. Science, logic, and culture take root from there.
The German philosopher Karl Jaspers called this period the “Axial Age” of history. During this time, many extraordinary processes took place.
In China, Confucius and Laozi lived, and Chinese philosophy began to take shape. In India, the Upanishads emerged, and Buddha lived. Zoroaster developed a philosophy about a world where the battle between good and evil raged. In Greece, at the same time, figures like Homer, Parmenides, Heraclitus, Plato, Archimedes, and others laid the foundations of modern Western philosophy and world science.
All of this happened simultaneously and independently. However, there is one common feature that unites these processes: according to Jaspers, humanity began to understand its existence, its self, and its limits.
That is precisely why we must travel back to the beginning—to the very origins. But on one condition—the mind must ignite! It must be a mind capable of catching fire!
* * *
I believe that every intellectual has a duty to understand their unique place. They must write simply and clearly, in the most civilized manner possible, without forgetting the problems that concern humanity—problems whose solutions demand new and bold ideas. They must possess the humility of Socrates, aware of how little they truly know, and remain fundamentally human.
Unlike minor philosophers who explore trivial problems, I see the primary purpose of philosophy in critical thinking about the universe and our place within it. These thoughts belong to the philosopher Karl Popper of the last century. Indeed, every piece of writing, book, or work should emerge from a similar mindset. The author, in turn, will strive to remain faithful to this perspective.
[1] The “Übermensch,” translated as “Overman” or “Superman,” is a concept created by the German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche (1844–1900). The Übermensch represents a being superior to modern humans, a stronger and more advanced entity. It is considered the next stage of human evolution. This idea is cited from Nietzsche’s book Thus Spoke Zarathustra.
[2] Аристотель. В поисках смысла. Аза Тахо-Годи, Алексей Лосев
