studying philosophy

chewy

simu asked about the courses i'd been too...

The School of Economics and Philosophy: Teaches practical philosophy on the basis of becoming more aware of yourself and your surroundings so you can deal with the world more competently. They also teach some sort of ethical economics and various other courses.

it started in london looking at ethical economics and has expanded since then, they have school on northumberland road where learning sandskript(sp?) is on the primary school curriculum

New Acropolis. The foundation course introduces practical philosophy showing the commonality in thinking between the philosophies and theologies of all the world's cultures.

this was started by an argentian man in france i believe , and is very interested in egaging in culture

from acropolis.org Founding Charter

I. To unite men and women of all creeds, races and social conditions around an ideal of universal fraternity.

II. To awaken a global vision in men and women through the comparative study of Sciences, Religions, Arts and Philosophies.

III. To enable men and women to live as part of Nature and to express their true personalities, by developing the capacities of each individual.

Both these courses start off at foundation level and can continue in sections for a decade.

Cafe Philo: A Swiss idea of informal discussions in a cafe/bar setting about every two weeks. Not occurring at the mo but I can put you in contact with the person who set up the one I went or you can set one up yourself.

the two courses where very much about practical philosophy, about learning to love learning and wisdom, about it not being a bigheaded idea to try and become a philosophy rather then just study it.... and use it every moment in your life

maybe other want to talk about how they came to study "philsophy" actively

SkepticOne

I remember seeing a lot of advertising of the School of Economics and Philosophy in tube stations in London about 10 years ago and wondering what sort of thing this was. There seems to be a fair amount of stuff on the web suggesting that it is an organisation promoting a specific philosophy based on eastern thought. Some go as far as to suggest it is some sort of cult.

eg this article from the Philosophers Magazine

Picture the scene. It’s the third week of a nationally advertised philosophy course. The tutor has been asked about the relationship between rationality and logic, and the students wait expectantly for his answer.

"Listen," he says, "this is logic. All trains are long. All coaches are long. Therefore, all trains are coaches. That is logic, and it is no good for anything at all. There is absolutely no relationship between rationality and logic."

Couldn’t happen? Well it did. Welcome to Introductory Philosophy, courtesy of The School of Economic Science (SES).

[....]

The fact that the SES is offering a philosophy to its students and not providing a general philosophy course throws up a number of interesting issues. The most significant of these is whether students are being misled by the school. It is true that if one reads the details of their literature then it is clear enough that the lectures are underpinned by an Eastern philosophy. However, unless one has some prior knowledge of the normal content of more traditional philosophy courses, then this will not appear to be at all out of the ordinary. Also, it is quite possible to arrive in the classroom for the first lecture, as I did, having seen only a newspaper advertisement for the school, where it is not made clear that it is a philosophy that is on offer. Indeed, some of the students that I spoke to had not been aware that they were not getting a traditional philosophy course. One told me that he had been so puzzled by the content of the first lesson that he had mentioned the SES to a friend, and had been shocked to discover that the school had the reputation of being "some kind of religious cult."

I would be interested in the views of anyone who has attended the course. Is this a fair representation?

chewy

and there are rumours that new acropolis is a cult too...

rumours about cafe philo being a cult never heard em

it is true that they are offering a philosophy but i dunno i don't really a problem with that... its practical philsophy

the main basis of a couter arguement to this is that the cult-watch groups mostly american that state that NA and SES are cults, are christian groups who have a fear of any org which suggests there is no god....

check for yourself...

i went to this course for two or three ....periods... whats the word im looking for....

firstly i found the discussions about being aware of surroundings.. being conscious of everything you do fascinating and enlightening

ses is more of a discussion thingy then a lecture atleast it was for the first two courses then the head of the irish school started "teaching" us he had a very fixed idea of what he was talking about which i found personally hard to deal with... he wasn't requiring that we agree with it at all, he was a accountant and thought that people were akin to a formula there was no such thing human error

--

im open to be corrected and the thought has crossed my mind myself and NA did address this issue, it doens't seem like a cult at all anyway there don't break you down, ask you about yourself, seperate you from people you know etc etc not in the slightest....

i think it just churches worried about losing their claim over people i'd be eager to see a rise in popularity of these sort of groups... as a way of helping peope search for their own morals and ethics now that the church nolonger dictates them

you can see even with all the new agey/self help stuff people are looking for something....

SkepticOne

I don't think there's anything wrong about an organisation set up to teach or discuss a particular philosophy.

Their London advertising, IIRC, made much use of 'classical' typography and design suggesting that it would be a general introduction to philosophy rather than a specific doctrine. This, in conjuction with the name "The School of Economics and Philosophy" imo, is a bit misleading.

DadaKopf

I personally think any credible philosophy course is one that begins by giving the student an all-round survey of the history of philosophy and which encourages students to actively engage in the ideas.

To me, especially now, the point of philosophy is to help people appreciate that there have been and still are many different ways to think about, or model the world in which we live. One may personally subscribe to a particular doctrine only when this diversity has been understood.

Most people do not do this in everyday life since they're unconsciously indoctrinated during primary and secondary socialisation periods and afterwards.

There's nothing wrong with specialist philosophical organisations, departments or groups. But joining them should be conditional on having already received the 'proper' philosophical education, whether that's self-taught or otherwise.

To dismiss logic like that is simply absurd. Logic can be criticised on many levels, not least for its reductionism, but come on, any beginner of logic can tell you propositions aren't valid if its statements/foundations are unsound. It actually only reinforces the understanding that logic is a good tool for exposing falsity.

Any 'philosophy' course that is in the business of blithely dismissing other viewpoints for the purpose of making a quick buck is exactly the same as the sophists charging money for meaningless rhetoric, against whom Socrates was so opposed.

This isn't philosophy, it's anti-philosophical, economically motivated indoctrination. A cult. It's codswallop.

chewy

NA uses classical typography and images too but that cos it is philosophy in the classical tradition...

you'll have seen the posters "studying philosophy from east to west" at first i thought west meant modern but that was my mistake... it means like indian to south american.. comparing all there ancient teachings which come to similar conclusions even with all the space of time and distance between them...

received the 'proper' philosophical education, whether that's self-taught or otherwise.

and whats that... :? where does one get it.... (get?)

the only places that do philosophy courses are milltown and maymooth, which come from theological and christian background... which limits them... hmm if i can remember from reading the nightcourses book trinity and ucd might do some basic ones too...

then you ask why do you need a course to study philosophy, you don't but i certainly think it helps i certainly prefer discussing to reading... it helps u focus, helps u meet like minded people makes it also more fun... it like saying you going learn spanish, few people have enough discipline to learn on there on so they go to course to guide em

i did notice that the gap in my knowledge was of modern philosophers as shown by my mind body question...

i have been wondering what is "philosophy" as with my philosophy versus left and right questions which i still havn't figured out.... hitler had a philsophy

a discussion with my phil teacher, he said that (studying) philosophy is about freedom... freedom to be yourself, to have all this information and opinions come at you and being able to filter it and come to your own conclusion rather then being swayed by any particular one of them

dadakopf i agree with what you were saying in the first half of your post, but i don't know about the second half perhaps i described my experince in the ses incorrectly for you to come to that conclusion, there was no dismissal logic

DadaKopf

a discussion with my phil teacher, he said that (studying) philosophy is about freedom... freedom to be yourself, to have all this information and opinions come at you and being able to filter it and come to your own conclusion rather then being swayed by any particular one of them

Yes, freedom. How can you 'freely' come to your own conclusions about the world if a particular course or curriculum is limited, truncated, to such selective reading/examination?

I said "'proper'" because I'm aware that it's a contestable value judgement. I put it in quotes to imply that it was both a personal and a cultural assumption. I then went on to define what I meant by 'proper'. Your quote above seems to agree with the definition I laid out and my conclusion.

Contradictorily you seem to defend the course's limited scope while at the same time justifying the idea that variety is an important condition for choice and freedom.

I personally also find the curriculum on offer in Maynooth and Trinity a little too restrictive. Too religious on one side, too British Analytic on the other. As far as Irish institutions go, I've personally found the UCD philosophy curriculum the broadest and most beneficial. And if people can't apply for the course as a mature full-time or part-time student, they can always do a night course.

Specialise after general introductions.

I don't accept a lecturer saying "logic made me work out all trains are coaches" or even someone like Wittgenstein saying all problems are philosophical problems so let's disregard 3,000 years of philosophy and just get on with things. The result is that people end up killing off critical enqury. It shuts off possible important avenues. By all means keep an open mind - that's my point - but one can't have an open mind if one's been knowingly or unknowlingly indoctrinated (and it's always the case that it's a bit of both). I think, anyway.