

Is philosophy irrelevant to general public? - Jun8
http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/06/27/lost-in-the-clouds/

======
Jun8
A good point that Prof. George makes is that people do not raise similar
issues with other similarly hard to understand realms, say physics or
mathematics.

"The difference persists in part because to wonder about philosophical issues
is an occupational hazard of being human in a way in which wondering about
falling balls is not. Philosophical questions can present themselves to us
with an immediacy, even an urgency, that can seem to demand a correspondingly
accessible answer. High philosophy usually fails to deliver such accessibility
and so the dismay that borders on a sense of betrayal."

Immediacy indeed! Suppose you are asked if you want to stop your father's
pacemaker because he no longer knows who he is (this was a recent article in
NYT). Or you have a premature baby with birth defects and you are asked if you
want to "let her go" (happened to a close friend). Is it OK if I betray my
wife just once (probably occurred to most of us)? I can list ten more from my
immediate life, I bet you can do, too.

Of course, the problem people have with philosophy is that it provides no
_answers_! It's a way to _analyze_ problems, not answer them. Therefore it
differs from all other sciences (does not use the scientific method) and
mathematics (is not an axiomatic system, except for logic). This is why, so
many people turn to religious fluff: the answers provided are not great but at
least your question gets answered.

