Philosophy?

The paper decree diploma does not say that they are now PHILOSOPHERS. All it says is that they have a degree in philosophy. This basically means that the University guarantees that this person "knows a lot about philosophy" and "has training in reading and evaluating philosophy".

In no way does the diploma says that he is now "a philosopher"

This is very similar to other degrees. Say, a person who has received a law degree does not automatically become a Lawyer. He needs to prove himself by passing a bar exam.

Philosophy is similar -- except there is no "standardized test" for them to prove themselves. To prove that you are philosopher you will have to publish your philosophy and get acceptance.

Can we stop comparing "The Philosopher" to Socrates, Platonic platitudes, and other loaded antiquarian drivel? What's so unphilosophical about it?... 'it's not wise, virtuous -- it's a perverted piece of writing, denatured from the Real philosophical journey!, it's gratuitous! philosophical accomplishment can't be judged!' --

philosophy isn't about wisdom. It's about the ideas behind ideas.. about worrying about the ontological status of the world while you sleep. Hell with wisdom, virtue, and Socrates. All philosophers do now is find out the "answers" to the problems faced by the metaphysics of science, to figuring out how to make a thinking machine, to describe the operation of language, to make the real real, to prove Ethics, and provide anecdotes for political theorists. Oh .. and did I mention to wrap our langauge in knots and keep the reason of Reason at bay~~~~~

I am not a philosophy graduate. Therefore, I wouldn't know.

However, the paper degree only states that they have a "degree in philosophy" not that they would be a "philosopher", per se.

So, the answer is ultimately, "no".....

I think.

Cheers

Jon

"philisophistry" hehehe, I love it. The world is full of too many sophists. They kinda breed like bacteria.

Anyway a philosopher is just a guy who thinks about stuff, you can be as formal or as informal as you like.

The best definition that I've heard is: "a philosopher is someone with an uncommon amount of common sense"

Yeah, thats the stuff, common sense isn't too common now is it? The piece of paper? Well thats just to keep your ego inflated long enough to get a job.

I'd doubt it. Most philosphists would probably just use it as a credential to prove that they've attained something in the eyes of many. When philosphically speaking, it probably is hypocritical to what philosophy is to begin with. I do sense the irony. I also see this going in other aspects of human life. I've heard it said that fate, is not without a sense of irony. Perphaps It was right.

My answer .is yes and no, and here are my reasons.Yes in the sense that paper qualifications do not necessarily make a philosopher, reasoning can best tell you who is a philosoher, when you encounter a philosopher no one tells you.No in the sense that at times, one has to authenticate whatever he or she is saying.So there are paper philosophers who cannot philosophise, the difference is very clear.

Why should they? I'm not sure where this measure of philosophical comes about. Can we measure philosophistry? But the piece of paper does not validate the philosophical nature of a human being, but it does not hinder it either.

Who bloody knows? Do bears s***t in the woods? Who cuts the Barber of Seville's hair? Does a flying arrow really travel? Do monkey's really need spanners? Are you being ironic? Are you a liar?