Philosophic thinking may be sedentary in nature, but it is a most vigorous form of cerebral activity. It is a dynamic process of thinking through an issue. In this section you will follow a series of steps designed to help you to reach a higher level of philosophic maturity. The approach we will take is action-oriented and personalized. The action centers on a series of exercises. Just as when you go to a gym to work out, you do not expect to get much out of your exercises if you are not physically active, so it goes with these philosophic exercises. Your personal development is dependent upon the quality of your input. You can tackle them on your own, with a partner, in a small group or even as a whole class. As the number of people working on these exercises together grows, the value of the return will diminish. Philosophical thinking is essentially a solitary business. Not that a philosopher must be a hermit, for philosophers are often thinking about people and given the nature of modern social existence, they usually find themselves in a crowd. The Wordsworthian lifestyle is a rare luxury today. He was able to bask in the solitude of his native environment, walking the hills and dales of the Lake District, thinking deeply and composing poems to communicate his ideas. Few of us can be, or even want to be, like Thoreau. We can rarely afford to distance ourselves from society in order to think, perhaps we don't really want to. But, whether in the company of others or alone, a prerequisite of attaining philosophic maturity is that you must be thinking for yourself. Large groups tend to intimidate, to stifle independent thinking and to transform problem-solving into an experience in social dynamics. Instead of thinking through an issue yourself at your own pace you will probably be swept up in a whirlwind of opinion, agreeing with one point of view, getting upset at another, wanting to reach a consensus, not wishing to be unpopular. To successfully complete these exercises, try to put yourself in a setting where you can think through an issue in your own way and share your conclusions without feeling threatened.
Exercise 1: Reacting
From the scenarios above, pick a topic that you find interesting. Read both opinions and answer the following questions:
- which of these positions seems to be closest to your way of thinking?
- what are the ideas that you particularly agree with?
- how does the other paired sentence make you feel? Why?
Discussion : Welcome to the world of philosophy! You have now embarked upon a journey toward greater self-understanding. You have taken the first step beyond blind acceptance, which is the condition that characterizes the severely philosophically challenged. You have read and thought about two somewhat conflicting opinions. You have experienced varying degrees of doubt and scepticism about some of the things that you read. These doubts are often the springboards that will propel you into the depths of philosophy. From initial reservations a search may emanate: a search for truth, for plausible alternatives to positions you doubt, for wisdom. This willingness to embark on a quest for truth is the essential starting point of philosophy. Only if you will to look can you expect to find - not only acceptable answers, but also a love of the process of seeking truth. This "love of wisdom" is the literal meaning of philosophy and fostering it is the purpose of this book.
Dangers : This first important step forward into the world of philosophy should be taken with trepidation. The trail toward wisdom is neither straight nor easily navigable. Like the pilgrims journeying down the trail to the promised land in Bunyan's Pilgrims Progress you will encounter many hazards en route. The first of these is a tendency to be overconfident. It may be tempting to claim that because you have read and reacted to two position statements you are now philosophizing. After all everyone else does, public figures seem to have philosophies about almost every topic, ranging from the purpose of their existence to which soap brand is better. The word, philosophy is often loosely used to connote opinion, idea or theory, but its errant public usage should not be a roadblock in your own personal journey. Philosophic thought may start on the surface like other more shallow forms of thinking but from there it proceeds past the skin-deep level to answer questions that focus on what humans should do, be and strive for, the meaning of life and the quality of existence.
    A second ever-present danger lurking behind the initial-reaction approach to philosophy is the feelings trap. Strong emotional responses can be inhibiting to clear thinking. The wording of the questions in Exercise 1 was designed to accentuate this pitfall. "How do you feel" is a more appropriate phrase in psychological counseling than in a philosophy text because in philosophy we seek to harness our feelings in order to think and act in a deliberate, detached way. Our emotional reaction to an issue is often immediate and visceral, but our philosophic response should be careful and profound. Are philosophers passionate beings? Of course! It is not necessary to be" a cold fish" to love wisdom. Many of the most profound thinkers pursue truth with a passion that attests to deeply held beliefs, but in order to discern the wood from the trees they must curb their feelings. Deep thoughts and wise action, not shallow passion, are the currency of philosophy.
    A third hazard for the novice philosopher is implied in the title of this section. Becoming more philosophic entails moving from the stage of reacting to the state of being pro active. Like electricity, the least philosophical of individuals may be expected to flow aimlessly and thoughtlessly along the path of least resistance. At the next stage, neophyte philosophers learn to recognize issues and to respond to them as they arise. It is during this stage that life seems to be happening to you, life seems to be beyond your control, the big picture is murky. It isn't until you reach philosophical maturity that you are able to anticipate, to reason and understand, to place events and ideas in a larger context, to be pro active.
Exercise 2: Self - Distancing
In this exercise look at all of the paired statements and respond to the following questions:
1. Which statement in each pair seems more critical?
2. What other labels would you use to distinguish one set of statements from the other?
3. Which set of claims is the "best fit" with your world view?
4. What are the features of this set that you find most appealing?
5. Can you identify elements of the other set of views that contain an element of truth?
Discussion: One instructive way to understand this process is through an analogy with coaching. How is a coach uniquely positioned to help an athlete? One answer to this question is, of course, that coaches are a one-step removed from the action. As they are not caught up in the sweat and turmoil of the contest, they have a more distanced perspective. They witness the ebb and flow of momentum, the strengths and weaknesses of each player and can craft a strategy to win accordingly. In a sense, this is philosophy in action. In the cerebral world of ideas the same strategy will reap dividends. By stepping back, taking a deep breath and thinking an issue through, you can avoid the dangers of emotional interference, reaching hasty conclusions and failing to see the bigger picture. The exercise you have just completed asks you to perform the process of self-distancing. You stepped back from the one question that was your initial focus in order to make comparisons between a cluster of statements. You proceeded to look more closely at the common denominators and to introspectively match these underlying features with your own ideology. Finally, the exercise presented you with the opportunity to search for truth in views that you do not personally espouse. Each of these techniques, when practiced frequently, can help to lead you to a state of philosophic detachment that will allow you to scratch beneath the surface of an issue, to identify the elements of truth in competing claims and to see beyond the immediate foreground toward the big picture on the horizon.
Dangers: The athlete thinks he was fouled, the opposing coach saw it differently, an action replay interpreted by expert analysts in the booth was inconclusive. Each of the entities in this scenario is one step further removed from the action. The perspective on the play gets broader at each juncture as the distance from the immediate confrontation increases. However, even at the furthest point, interpretation of the event is colored by the limitations of information provided about the event [ camera angles, etc.] and the foibles of human perception [for example, commentator bias]. Similarly, it is impossible to become so detached from a philosophic issue that true objectivity can be attained. Even scientific research, which may appear to be objective, is affected by human bias, so certainly the more woolly areas of investigation that go beyond science [ which is the literal meaning of metaphysics ] will contain an element of subjectivity. One of the products of the philosophic process is healthy scepticism, so that, paradoxically, even as you learn to distance yourself, your awareness that you can never truly detach yourself increases. You will learn to question objectivity claims, to examine the premises underlying scientific hypotheses and conclusions and to recognize the fallibility of human judgement. So, although self-distancing is desirable in philosophy and novices in the field should strive to attain it, it would be dangerous to ever expect to be, or claim to be, truly objective.
Exercise 3: Identifying
1. Study and briefly define in your own words what each of the following list of ten philosophic issues means:
Human nature [good / bad ]
Human existence [ purpose / meaning ]
Human values [ virtues / vices ]
Moral being [ right / wrong ]
Social being [ duties / responsibilities ]
Change [ nature / consequences ]
Justice [cause / effect ]
Freedom [liberty / determinism ]
Happiness [personal / utilitarianism ]
Beauty [ recognition / experience ]
2. Can you design a question that you might ask in everyday conversation for each of these philosophic topics?
3. Can you find an example of each of these philosophic topics in the paired statements?
4. Which topics seemed to be alluded to most frequently in the statements?
5. What do your reactions to the statements tell you about your views on each of these topics?
Discussion: Beneath the seemingly placid surface of even the most innocuous statements there lies a veritable treasure trove of sunken meaning. The process of becoming philosophically mature entails moving from shallow awareness to profound recognition. When you encountered exercise three, you became familiar with a partial list of philosophical questions. It may have surprized you to find how deeply and frequently they were embedded in statements about aspects of everyday existence. As we proceed down this path together, I expect that this initial source of surprize will be replaced by a recognition that a greater source of astonishment would be any statement that was not based on a philosophic premise. Every thought, every reflective action, the nature of your being and the quality of your relationships emanate from your philosophy of life. A reason to pursue this process of philosophic growth is to learn to identify the specifics of your own belief-system, to transform taken-for-granted assumptions into examined principles.
Dangers: The process of introspective identification is socially dangerous. It may transform an individual from the ever popular social foil depicted hilariously by Peter Sellers as Chauncy Gardner in Being There to a self-actualizing principled person. Chauncy had no views of his own. He became increasingly popular, rising eventually to the position of President of the United States by going with the flow. He mirrored the actions of those around him, parroted their words and parodied their behavior. Do you know anyone who is popular and successful precisely because they don't think for themselves, who always fits in with everyone else's plans and who can be persuaded to do almost anything? After disciplined self-distancing and careful examination of underlying principles, such an individual might make some decisions that would jeopardize popularity based on malleability. This process leads to self-awareness, to independent thinking and to principled action. Do you think the risks associated with this danger are worth taking?
Exercise 4: Analyzing
1. How would you distinguish between the following words, all of which describe the process of philosophic analysis?
                        Comparing
                        Contrasting
                        Criticizing
                        Examining
                        Exploring
                        Inspecting
                        Investigating
                        Probing
                        Scrutinizing
2. Let's use these analytical tools to conduct a micro-analysis of a phrase in one of the statements [ for example, "sports is a form of play" or "we are victims of circumstance"]. Proceed through the analysis by answering the following questions:
a) What do the words in the statement mean? Check each word for ambiguity, contradictions, inaccurate usage, double meanings, etc.
b) What do the words tell you about the author's purpose?
c) What values are implied in this statement?
d) How valid and reliable do you consider this phrase to be?
e) If this statement were shown to be true, what would be it's consequence?
f) What are the presuppositions on which this phrase is based?
g) In what ways does this statement conflict and/or agree with what you know about this topic?
3. Can you think of other ways in which philosophic analysis may be undertaken?
Discussion: Analysis is the heart of the philosophic process. In earlier exercises you practiced moving beyond the stage of reacting to distance yourself sufficiently from an issue that you can identify philosophical premises of an argument. The process of discovery culminates in critical analysis that takes various forms. You conducted a form of linguistic analysis when you differentiated between words that describe the process and again when you looked closely at a phrase you selected. You observed, no doubt, that similar words have slightly different shades of meaning and that those shades can be manipulated by a skilful speaker to portray an issue in a certain light. Words sometimes seem to take on a life of their own. In theory they are our primary form of communication, but in practice they frequently serve to obscure or pervert our meaning. How often do you find yourself involved in conversations that revolve around such phrases as, "but, I didn't mean . . . " or," what I meant to say was . . . ?" We can lose our meaning in the words we select, we can be persuaded by the adroit choice of words and we can even create new meanings by the way we piece words together in poetry and in everyday parlance. As your philosophical dexterity develops, you will become more metaphysically adept. Metaphysics deal with the nature of reality. You took the first step into this branch of philosophy when you attempted to define the words and encounter their reality as part of this exercise. Of course, metaphysics are much more than word games. Beyond the words lay a wealth of concepts that can be examined using logic or such forms of philosophic investigation as phenomenology, which involves the discovery of conceptual essence through eidetic reduction. To this point, the process of philosophizing may have seemed to be solitary - just you and your thoughts embarking on a search for wisdom. Nothing could be further from the truth. The philosophic pathway is a bustling highway teeming with the greatest minds our civilization has produced. Critical analysis is informed by this wealth of wisdom. Working in an intellectual vaccuum, you may progress to a point, but to reach your philosophic potential you must consult the wisdom of the ages. Individual philosophers and schools of thought can help you to understand more fully. As we proceed to think about applied philosophy of movement in this book, I will introduce you to some of these resources.
Dangers: Analyzing can be a destructive process. It entails systematically shredding an argument, poking holes in a theory, questioning your own assumptions and beliefs. The better you get at it, the more the walls of your preconceived reality will crumble. On the one hand, critical theory is essential to the growth process. Many philosophers have spent their life ripping up the ideas of others and, by ridiculing such notions as that the world is flat, have advanced civilization. On the other hand, if you are so successful in your analyzing that your old unexamined world lies in ruins at your feet, you may experience feelings of emptiness, or what some existential philosophers have called angst or anomie. There is no need to be daunted at the prospect, however, because although the heart of the philosophic process is questioning, criticizing and analyzing, the soul is building, unifying and synthesizing.
Exercise 5: Synthesizing
Select one pair of scenario statements and proceed as follows:
1. Create a summary cluster of key words and concepts from the position you find most acceptable.
2.Study the alternative position, draw from it any notions that you agree with and create a new conceptual cluster.
3. Consider what the sentences do not say on the topic and make a third cluster of key words to remind you of concepts that should be examined in this context.
4. Combine the clusters to create your own philosophy on the topic.
Discussion: In this exercise, you had to move beyond the reaction stage and distance yourself from the sentences to consider the topic as a whole. Your first task was to identify key words and phrases and then to distinguish between levels of truth as you adopted some and discarded others. In order to complete the second task of sifting through the opposing position to find a statement you could make your own, you had to distance yourself from an argument that you might have found distasteful at first glance. Recognizing truth wherever it may appear, even in the words of an opponent, is a crucial element of synthesis. Next, you had to step away from the text and marshal all of the resources at your disposal to take a larger view of the topic. Your access to this resource pool of accumulated wisdom of unfathomable depth will increase as you read, discuss and encounter new ideas, new theories and new schools of thought. Having collected together all the information necessary to synthesize your philosophy, you were asked to unify the clusters into one constellation of ideas. This is not a simple process. You have to look beneath the surface for connected ideas and ,when you find them, weave them together into an acceptable whole. Eliminating contradictions and inconsistencies takes time, thinking through what you really believe can be exhausting, but as Socrates so profoundly stated, "the unexamined life is not worth living."
Dangers: Synthesizing a philosophy is a lifelong journey along an arduous and perilous path. It takes time and effort. Recognizing truth in opposing positions, being aware that for every point there is a counterpoint and being open to acknowledging and even embracing a different conclusion is often difficult, but it is impossible to reach philosophical maturity if you are close-minded. You are trading the bliss of ignorance, of unexamined beliefs, biases and prejudices for a lifetime of challenge. I exhort you to be all that you can be!