Now , based upon some of my writings, there is a general misconception that I love the subject of Philosophy. And even greater misconception (leaving Sarcasm aside) that I am a Philosopher. Now this post is to justify why calling me a Philosopher or a person who loves/likes Philosophy is terribly wrong.
“Philosophy is the study of reality, knowledge, and values, based on logical reasoning rather than observation. This includes general and fundamental problems, such as those connected with existence, mind, and language.”
Thanks to Wikipedia for giving the above definition of Philosophy. Now I don’t write specifically about a single topic or a subject. I write for the love of writing or rather for the love of expressing myself. And that because I love myself more than I do, any other soul on Earth. And we are not here to define Love (Well as a matter of fact nobody can !) and get into a never ending monologue (Considering its me writing and you just reading). Moreover I never really “Study” Reality, Knowledge and Values. I just live in the Reality (there is a lot of difference) , gain knowledge (about anything interesting) and to be completely frank totally oblivious to Values (Since I am very much uncertain as to which one to follow where !). But Logical Reasoning is an area which I personally like, but I like it just the way Sherlock Holmes would have treated the subject. That makes me no more a Philosopher than Holmes is (Apart from all the other things he is ! And I wish to use ‘is’ here as in present tense since I am a great admirer of his work and believe he is eternal. But narcissism later !).
Now , I have read some books (lets say just One!) on Philosophy. And heard some people talk Philosophy. And when talking, its about Values (which under the above definition come under the subject of Philosophy.) one should follow in his/her life. And since I was the audience , it was invariably my life. Now the most common of these values would be to be Frank (I appreciate that in a different manner), to Unconditionally Love everyone , to never hurt anyone (feelings obviously) etc etc.
Now where I differ from the Philosopher is that he/she says you should be total Frank or Open to everyone. The reason being it improves your life. But majority (lets say the ones you meet day to day, leaving the top selling authors apart.) never are able to explain the process in which it brings about the change. I appreciate being Frank. But I wouldn’t agree with the consequences. It wouldn’t exactly improve your life. It would infact contribute to the opposite. Because , you being frank wouldn’t change the entire world being frank to you. (Now I appreciate being Frank and you may ask as to why so ? Because it takes real courage and mental strength to do so. And not everyone can do it.) If you ask me whether I am frank with everyone about everything , my answer would be a RELATIVE ‘Yes’. Meaning, I tend to be more Frank than people around me are. But that doesn’t mean I am totally frank about everything thus enabling the other person to take advantage of me.
Next coming to the Unconditionally Loving part. First I am not an expert in the field of Love, Sentiment etc. Or to be more specific I am immune to such feelings towards a majority of the Homo sapien Population (Lets say the World Minus a Dozen !). So I never know how to Love someone leave alone Conditionally or Unconditionally doing it. So taking into account the commonly used definition of Love (please Google it yourself !), my Question what advantage does it give you to love someone unconditionally who is never going to even consider you ? The more unconditionally loving you are, irrespective of what the person does to you, the more you start losing importance in the other person’s life . (Now this is about the NORMAL person. And in my definition , NORMAL appeals to the Animal part of the Human population. Those who show their human part obviously are a minority and don’t fit here). So it is better to Love someone who will always love you no matter what. And that simply reduces the set under consideration to your Parents, Grandparents and ‘if possible’ Siblings (Now this is because Human Siblings unlike the general Animal population, have the famous Sixth Sense. And I consider anything with a sixth sense and having something to lose to you or gain from you, as incapable of showing Unconditional Love. So they are also to be kept out of consideration too.). And of course who can change the inevitable, when every Man who is born in this World has a strong feeling towards the Opposite Sex (more than once). And the same holds true for every Woman of this World. I refrain myself from using the word Love here exactly , because often the strong feeling is initiated by the urge to ‘Make Love’ rather than ‘Love’ itself. And again inevitably ends in ‘Making Love’.
Now there is yet another idea in which I might differ from the conventional Philosopher and infact a significant majority of the human population, though the idea or the reason behind the idea is not so Uncommon. Most would say “You should never hurt another person’s feelings.” . Now this is not the idea I am exactly challenging. I say “Its better to hurt another person’s feelings today so that they don’t get hurt by someone else tomorrow (when they have no control over it)”. Or in other words it is actually Okay to Play with a person’s feelings today in a small manner so that they are better equipped to face anything on a larger scale. More like Immunization or Vaccination.
It is often said “Any Big Mistake to make a Person Happy is Acceptable. But Even a small Smile that hurts another Person is intolerable”. Now Practically speaking, in one way or the other some person is going to , in one way or the other hurt someone else. No one can stop that. That’s the way the World functions. So why should you leave people who are Short-tempered or Shy or Introvert just as they are (not to hurt the feelings of individual groups) ? I mean, its okay to be roaming around in Orange and Yellow Pinstriped Trousers. But why leave people with such a character just like that ? Why not offer some Free Personality Development ? Okay, till they are in School or College. But once they are put in a work environment , which obviously requires ‘Team Work’ in one way or the other, how can you expect them to survive ? So isn’t it better to introduce a little flavour of the World to them before that ? Especially if he/she is a close friend of yours ? This is where I say , “Chaos inevitably works over Cohesion” (quoting a favourite TV show of mine, ‘House MD’. And to a very dear friend of mine , its purely co incidence. I am not advocating House-ism through this!). You cant teach a person the difficulties of the world by Lecturing them. Its takes Practical Sessions to hit the idea straight home. So even if the process involves having to tease/rag your friend its okay since , it over a period of time, activates the most wonderful aspect of Human Nature. Adaptation. The person is forced to Adapt. They would be anyway forced to in another hostile environment later. So better to have it done under the supervision of a Friend rather than some stranger. And of course doing it in groups would improve the situation where the person doesn’t feel highly depressed that something is happening only to him/her. This also promotes group involvement in a place and creates a possibility for Team Spirit since everyone is used to pulling the leg of the other, thereby knowing the strengths and weaknesses.
And to those who boldly preach “You should respect others ideas” to me, I kindly reply “Oh. With all due respect, I do. But if I am to oppose every single idea of yours would you RESPECT mine ? “ .
This proves that I could rarely be a person who Advocates Philosophy. I do sometimes, like everyone, quote some Philosophical Phrases, but that is just to improve the presentation of the content.
Moreover , Philosophers when asked to choose between Humanity and Rationality, they would either choose to tread on the thin line in between or totally side with Humanity. I on the other hand hate being Cat on the Wall and will plainly take the Rational side. (And I have certain sentiments, Yes. But the number of people for whom I hold any sentiments for are very less.).
Some also say you should control your emotions. Like Anger. Now I myself am not qualified for this discussion , for even I don’t exercise great control over my emotions. Moreover I believe , Controlling Emotions is like Pressurizing a Vessel. And it can only take a specified quantity of Pressure. So its actually better to understand totally your emotions and manipulate then rather than controlling them.
Either way , my ideals differ from that of a Philosopher. And I am not exactly interested in the subject of Philosophy. It has already quite a lot of people involved in it. This post is to simply justify the differences between Me and The Philosopher. And I think I have done some justice to it , with a lot of Narcissism (As Usual).
Comments Always Welcome. Reasonable or Not.