Why is serious philosophy dominated by academics?

Honestly, that a philosopher/scholar would TEACH for a living was totally new when Kant did it, now we all assume that a person can't really be a serious philosopher if they're not in academia.

What gives with the institutionalized constraints?

are they beneficial to the field or detrimental? or if it's a mixture, how so and to what degree for each?

2008-05-29T10:17:07Z

It's not that i think Kant was the first professional teacher, it's that I know that Kant was the first, --- I'll qualify -- in over 1,000 years, who was both a well known philosopher and a teacher.

people just couldn't make enough money. philosophers were usually rich playboys reading books from an early age or monks who had no need for money. not really a point of contention, check it out. He taught, for example, the first anthropology class. He taught logic, sciences, geography, whatever needed taught, in order to make ends meet.

That's not really the point anyways. The point is that until about 130-150 years ago, philosophers were not college professors, now they are professors exclusively.

2008-05-29T15:27:35Z

in the name of all that is holy, the point isn't whether or not plato taught socrates, (as I say in the last edit), the point is that professional philosophy means academicians, and this IS a new concept, new in the last 150 years or so at least.

again, between aristotle and kant, most philosophers were rich folks with time to spend on studying or monestarians who were obligated to make a study of ontology or theology... it just wasn't the case that people taught in universities as the rule -- the only well-known philosopher to do so after aristotle was kant, that's all i said and all i meant... the QUESTION was *WHY* is philosophy dominated by academicians, not whether or not some unknown was an exception to the rule before kant.
people read what they want, and not what is, i suppose.

Anonymous2008-05-29T01:46:53Z

Favorite Answer

Well, there are probably only two ways to make a living as a philosopher. That's to teach at a university, and to publish books. And there's not a whole lot of money in publishing philosophy books anymore, unless it's packaged as a new age "self help" type of thing, it's not going to sell. That leaves academics as the only viable alternative.

J J2008-05-29T14:31:40Z

The professors have certainly taken the mantle of philosopher..... however they are not the only ones. Comedians are some of the greatest philosophers of our time. George Carlin is a philosopher supreme if I have ever heard one....... he questions that which is typically unquestioned.

Philosophy is often a means to an end.... in the case of Carlin comedy, in the case of academics teaching. Teaching just happens to be a natural compliment to philosophy because philosophy encompasses the study of everything.

Also, you seem to forget that Socrates was a teacher...... as was Aristotle and Plato. They were the first and formed the first university...... both disciplines were born at the same moment and of the same people, so it is a natural fit.

Anonymous2008-05-29T05:23:28Z

"Plato (427-347) was Socrates's student. Aristotle (384-322) was Plato's student. Alexander the Great was Aristotle's student. Plato set up a school called the Academy. Following this example Aristotle set up a school called the Lyceum. "
http://www.andrew.cmu.edu/user/kk3n/meta/aristotle.html

These men did not sell books for a living, or go on talk shows. Why do you think Kant was the first professional teacher?

The world abounds with non-institutionalized philosophy, mostly in the form of books, and sometimes--very often the best--are fiction.
Pilgrim's Progress
The Scarlet Letter
Les Miserables
Moby Dick (the most studied book in English after the Bible)
Tolstoy, Chekov, Homer, T.S. Elliot, Camus, Loren Eiseley, etc.

It is very often the non-academics who turn the academic world on its head.

circadian082008-05-29T02:00:45Z

Academics is a recent discipline of human's excersize of their senses. Academics creates a universal language in which we use to better identify our places here on earth. The reason most philosophy is respected through academics is because it requires a recorded source of investment of time in a particular area, and because it is a very well known network. Might I add, there must be some means of declaring something reputable or credible. Can you imagine living in a haze full of messy ignorantly confident falsities.
When you think about it, true philosophers are usually self teachers. A genius could possibly hide inside his home reading books continuously, writing, and delving into the creative imagination of his curiosities. The world may never even know this persons name. Perhaps those that humble their intelligence and do not value that of communicating with others as a product and loyalty to their own philosophy is truly admirable.

Anonymous2008-05-29T01:40:38Z

Academics tend to be up their own backsides too much! Everyone can philosophise and you don't need academic qualifications to THINK, QUESTION and expand your mind. You could say that the academic philosophers are not really free thinkers because they are constrained within the boundary's of their own research and institution.

Show more answers (4)