So is a hammer, if you don't know how to use it. Please, consider this . . . It is always possible that you don't know yet what you're talking about, or rather, there is far more to the subject than you think. Why do you believe "Philosophy is useless" and "Theology is worse." What "use" are you trying to get from Philosophy? What "good" were you expecting from Theology? Socrates would ask you to question your truths. Peace and Love
Theology is no worse than seeking out the symbolism in popular culture. It doesn't have to be there, or rather, to have been put there, for you to see it. I view philosophy the same way; irrespective of whether there's an inherent meaning to the universe, the process of surmising possible meanings is vital in allowing us to conceive those meanings and to make them a reality. Studying philosophy as we've come to imagine it - dead Greeks with beards... - does seem a little pointless. Knowing their ideas is perhaps worthwhile, but only to know the grounding of later, more developed ideas. Philosophy is simply a word that defines a process that most of us, at some point, experience. Whether it is useless or not, it still is. Hard to imagine it ever really going away.
By the way, "Philosophy is useless, theology is worse." Is from the Dire Straits song "Industrial Disease." and I have it.
Even the math and sciences are theology. They are based off of axioms... or stated assumptions. Making a huge statement like that is throwing the baby out with the bath water.
This is like the media bias thing though. People find out that the media is biased, even ¡shockhorror! when it agrees with them, and they go nuts and, like you said, throw the baby out with the bathwater. The fact that something is a stated assumption rather than an incontrovertible fact doesn't actually need to change your outlook as long as you keep in mind that it's a stated assumption. All it means is that you believe it if it is strongly evidenced, and believe what is more strongly evidenced over what isn't, rather than know it.
the six blind men and the elephant are at it again. several who are unneccesarily arguing are both right and only imagining conflict in the context of their perspectives. =^^= .../\...
The validity of philosophy isn't only in the conclusions it comes to. If you take those conclusions without understanding the reasoning that led up to it, you're missing the point.
All conflict is imagined if you factor out negative consequences. Some philosophies are polar opposite but lead people to the same end result; doesn't mean they're the same.
yup. they just take place in the same universe, looking at it different ways. as for the thread topic of usefullness, well the usefullness of anything depends on what you want to use it FOR. not all things are equally useful for all other things, ns^3 as that may sound. everything is useless to what it doesn't relate to or isn't about, and i think a lot of people do expect things of philosophy, and even beleif, that have nothing to do with what either of them are. =^^= .../\...
Theologians didnt find it themselves, someone (probably the philosopher) handed it to them and they convinced themselves that a god did it.
Saw this in action, actually: they played us piano pieces by John Cage (big fan of chance procedures, composing through the I Ching) and Pierre Boulez (big fan of very rigorous, mathematically precise, complex music) and had us guess which was which. It was pretty hard, but it's because the two are basically doing the same thing to achieve the result - just focusing on completely different parts of the process.
Many of us see the world through rational terms, through language and concepts. It's natural for us to do so and thus philosophy is a very broad term for reflection, contemplation and foremost wisdom. The love of wisdom is not necessarily, however, the love of concepts. This is something that has been misconstrued.