Blog Response Five

Ethan Skinner

Mrs. Wagener

AP English

8/11/2013

Blog Response Five

            Philosophical thought has been an important part of human culture for thousands of years. While questions of origin and purpose are innate in the human mind, and fun to think about, they are certainly not easy to answer. From a finite perspective, how could any one person possibly hope to comprehend questions regarding infinite subject matter, such as the nature of time or God?

            For the most part, none of the philosophers in the book really stood out to me as particularly insightful. Occasionally one of the philosophers that Gaarder described would make an interesting point, but generally I felt that most of the philosophers were simply making things up, and then espousing them as the truth regardless of whether or not there was anything insightful about their philosophy. One exception to this rule was Locke. His concept of primary and secondary qualities of objects was fascinating to me (although Alberto’s classification of color and taste as purely qualitative aspects was ridiculous, seeing as light an flavor both have scientific scales of measurement) and I agree with his thought that it is inherent in human reason that God exists. For the most part, I found that the other philosophers were arrogant academics who felt that their own minds were a better source of information than the world around them. Obviously, people like Socrates had the right idea, actually asking solid questions until he arrived at a solution. But even Socrates fell short, in that he did not back his theories with real evidence, opting instead to take people’s inabilities to answer his questions as proof that their views were false, therefore making his views correct. This is a frustrating tendency in all of philosophy. I love science, and philosophy often feels like a deliberate rejection of the scientific method which, while flawed, is generally the best way to find answers to our questions.

            In regards to the question of my position in the rabbit’s fur, I feel that the premise is flawed. To ask where I reside in the rabbit’s fur is to ask whether I am a seeker of knowledge, longing to gaze into the eyes of the “magician” or am comfortably nestled down in my safe little world, happy to live my days in ignorance. I reject the concept of the rabbit. I am no hater of knowledge, and love scientific research and the acquisition of new knowledge. But in regards to questions of the universe itself, I have found my answers. I believe that the Christian bible is the inspired, infallible, inerrant word of God, and that anything I may need to know in regards to my origins or the purpose of my existence are contained therein. I am happy to seek answers to most questions through scientific reasoning, but in regards to more existential questions, I look to the God for my answers