Bertrand Russel: The Value of Philosophy

The Value of Philosophy in the Problems Of Philosophy

In striking similarity to the paper I have made about Lipman’s Community of Inquiry, the problem
stands still, we have a surplus and scarcity of information, all at the same time. In Russel’s
work, he claims that the primary problem of Philosophy is that the retention and interest of the
people in Philosophy has slowly declined, due to the linear preference to the physical sciences
that are proven through the mediums of inventions and innovations. He claims that even if we
live in a utopian society, where we are thoroughly developed in the physical form, and that we
are already safe from most threats to health, there is still much more to do.

Philosophy as a soft science, does more than what meets the eye, this is where the concept of
society is stringed upon, on how we as a community must further progress, the mindsets, norms
and dogmas, the systems, the policies and agencies that safeguards morality, rights, law and
conscience. Philosophy is what keeps a human being humane.

In defining the value of Philosophy, we must understand that it is the core essence for structural
development, as society will not progress without intelligent beings, we must take root of the
value that Philosophy is what makes the world move forward. Afterall, practice always starts
from theories. Philosophy plays a fundamental role in world and nation building, societal
structures take its homage from the ideals of philosophers, and how they determined the quality
of intelligence pushed people out of their negligent state and into innovation and progress.

Without communal inquiry, knowledge would be in disarray, we would be tempted into oblivion,
and diminish our feeling of certainty and knowingness. Nothing is scarier than unfamiliarity.
Philosophy can be defined as that umbrella that shades over everything else, but is neglected
by most, more often than not, because of the stringing stereotype that it is specified for people
with inept interest and strong motivation in the soft sciences.

We push forward this culpability to two things: the people and its systems. The system neglects
the idea of mindful citizenry, as they are scared to be overthrown by a smart society. They reject
the notion that once these people have in-depth knowledge of societal structures, most policing
power would be rid of the might over mass. The culpability also lies within the people, who
sought comfort over progress, most are comfortable enough to ever manage survivability alone,
and pay no mind and attention to what could have been done better, this narrative has been
deeply rooted to the psyche of the people, which made them vulnerable in comparison to those
who know.

In conclusion, the value of Philosophy and its problems are rooted within the practice of the
people, in the age where information and discourse is prevalent and accessible, we must take
advantage of these leverages into emulsifying conversations and building a stronger community
of inquiry.