You are viewing the historical archive of The Philosophy Forum.
For current discussions, visit the live forum.
Go to live forum

Is it possible certain forms of philosophy are harmful?

Outlander May 13, 2020 at 08:25 5050 views 20 comments
Had some doubts about wanting to post this but came up with an interesting enough hypothetical to read so am going to. I've always been fond of philosophy, unintentionally when I was younger and more so today. Not being a man of stature, in the physical sense nor the global sense, I've always looked at higher understanding as a sort of key to unlocking my dreams so to speak. I was not disappointed. That said as I began to read more about different forms and new views I started to ponder something. Just now actually.

Assuming this mere topic for debate (and the points to consider behind it) are a positive thing or at least not negative, I'd like to thank this forum for the inspiration. I'll start with some examples from posts I've read here and what real world effects one could assume they have produced. With one or two being a bit more than assumption.

Solipsism. A poster here insisted the concept should be outright banned from discussion across any philosophical forum. Another poster said deep belief in the concept is akin to cutting oneself off from the world and is like 'living in purgatory'. It could and has led others to a feeling of depersonalization and some are unable to escape this feeling at times of rest.

Absolute subjectivism. To the point any experience or object could be 'a hallucination' or 'a dream'. Goes without saying.

Touching on that last one, take this fictional example of a case of it that illustrates the potential downside.

Say we're all back in old... something like Rome. Philosophy has swept over the land and the streets are filled with lively, intellectual debate. The current emperor was a devout student of the field and his view of reason and subjectivism has allowed him and his family to be the humblest to date. There is not a resource or luxury that is available to him that is not available to all. Things are wonderful and the people couldn't be happier.

A few years go by. There has been talk of hostilities but no order is ever given to the Army. One day a frantic and out-of-breath Roman general comes into the emperor's chambers and states a foreign army has begun attacking and asks 'What is the order?'. The emperor turns to him after a moment and calmly asks him 'How do we know they really exist?'. After being taken back for a moment, the stunned general informs him several dozen soldiers of the first legion have just been killed and that he thinks they can drive them back by means of artillery and reinforcements if he would only give the order. The emperor ponders this for a few moments before turning to a disgruntled general and says, waving an open hand everso annoyingly in cadence with his words, 'How do I know you're really here?'. Shaking his head after recovering from just about fainting, a dismayed general exits the room with his hands on his head in sheer disbelief and tells his forces to stand down. Sparing the bloody details, this particular civilization was never heard from again. Not even in the most obscure of history books.

These are fictional examples of course. But are they really?

So. What do you think? Can philosophy be a double-edged sword? A cruel mistress? Both creator and advancer of civilization and a destroyer of it?

Comments (20)

jgill May 13, 2020 at 23:28 #412472
Political philosophy, perhaps. Nazism. Judicial philosophy? Areas of actual impact.

Can metaphysics be harmful? Georg Cantor suffered a mental breakdown trying to defend his philosophical/mathematical ideas. So, yes, set theory can be harmful to one's health and well-being! :gasp:
hateloveschool May 14, 2020 at 01:43 #412493
Yes, it is possible, as in it is conceivable, that a certain philosophy can be harmful.

I don't think the question that interesting. It seems similar to asking, "is it possible that aliens exist." The answer is yes, but that's not what we're trying to ask, we're trying to ask, "Do aliens exist?"

I wonder if you mean the question to ask, "are there philosophical questions that are harmful?" And that seems more interesting since we have to the define "harmful." Do we mean physically harmful, psychologically harmful, etc. Lastly, Doesn't this definition of "harmful" depend on a specific philosophical position which not everyone agree with?

Just putting those out there, fun question.
Shawn May 14, 2020 at 02:11 #412502
Quoting Outlander
Another poster said deep belief in the concept is akin to cutting oneself off from the world and is like 'living in purgatory'. It could and has led others to a feeling of depersonalization and some are unable to escape this feeling at times of rest.


I have said that. And, I honestly believe too much philosophy, which is preoccupied with death and living a good life instead of a mediocre one or too much pessimism, can actually lead to suicide.

Not that surprising in my opinion.
Pinprick May 14, 2020 at 02:26 #412514
Quoting Outlander
Can some philosophies be harmful?


Sure, but can’t basically everything be harmful?
Shawn May 14, 2020 at 03:02 #412531
Quoting Shawn
And, I honestly believe too much philosophy, which is preoccupied with death and living a good life instead of a mediocre one or too much pessimism, can actually lead to suicide.


Anti-philosophers unite!
Pfhorrest May 14, 2020 at 03:21 #412538
The “philosophies” that can be harmful are, upon deeper examination, antithetical to philosophy itself, in that rather than seeking wisdom, they either declare it impossible or make excuses for not needing it. These include solipsism yes, also egotism, and subjectivisms as well as relativisms about both what is real and what is moral, which I argue all boil down to nihilism about at least one or the other of those things. But it’s not just that approach, but also any kind of appeal to anything besides reason, including intuition, authority, or popularity, which I argue all boil down to faith. More indirectly, justificationism entails nihilism too, and both scientism and social constructivism boil down to justification about either morality or reality respectively. And any kind of supernaturalism, or the moral analogue thereof, or generally any supposition about things transcending all experience, including certain sense of “materialism” that don’t just mean phenomenalism, all entail making appeals to faith.

All of these “philosophies” end up saying not to try to figure out what is true or what is good, either because it’s hopeless or because it’s unnecessary. So all of them are really not after wisdom at all — the ability to tell truth from falsehood and good from bad — but instead running away from it. They are not so much philosophy at all, but “phobosophy”, the fear of wisdom. Because trying is hard.

That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t be able to talk about them, though.
Shawn May 14, 2020 at 03:25 #412539
Quoting Pfhorrest
That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t be able to talk about them, though.


Not in the least, at least in regards to what is destructive psychologically.
Pinprick May 14, 2020 at 04:12 #412570
Reply to Pfhorrest It seems presumptive to assert that only certain “philosophies” can be harmful. Regardless I disagree that nihilism, and all that it entails, is not an attempt at discovering wisdom. It isn’t through lack of effort that people become nihilists, etc. It’s through reasonable examination of the facts, or supposed facts, of any particular field of discourse. At least when done properly it is. I would say that many of the precursors necessary to even do philosophy cause some sort of harm. Doubt, for instance, in matters deemed significant (religion, existence, etc.) can cause fear, which is a sort of harm, or at least has the potential to become harmful. The opposite of doubt, conviction, leads to similarly harmful situations, like drinking Kool-Aid from a cult leader.
Shawn May 14, 2020 at 04:15 #412571
But, I've been assailing philosophical pessimism for the past 10 years and now get a show of hands.
180 Proof May 14, 2020 at 04:49 #412578
Quoting Outlander
What do you think? Can philosophy be a double-edged sword? A cruel mistress? Both creator and advancer of civilization and a destroyer of it?
Can some philosophies be harmful?

What makes an object (i.e. project) either a tool or weapon - medicine or poison - is the way we use it on ourselves, others or the world. Nothing is inherently harmful, though misunderstandings or misjudgments or mal(adaptive)practices make harmful outcomes more likely than not. Philosophy is no more or less harmful than (e.g.) astrology or politics, religion or pornography, in this regard.
Pfhorrest May 14, 2020 at 05:18 #412587
Quoting Pinprick
It isn’t through lack of effort that people become nihilists, etc. It’s through reasonable examination of the facts, or supposed facts, of any particular field of discourse.


...leading to the conclusion that there are no answers to be found there, and then giving up on the pursuit of them. It was doing philosophy unsuccessfully that lead them to that conclusion, sure, but the conclusion itself that they reach is that success there is not possible and striving for it is hopeless, rather than merely that it hasn't been attained yet.
I like sushi May 14, 2020 at 05:25 #412589
Reply to Outlander I would argue strongly that any ‘philosophies’ that aren’t potentially harmful are not ‘philosophies’ at all.

Mistakes and faults are a necessary part of active pursuits. ALL activities (‘philosophical’ or otherwise) are potentially dangerous - that is precisely where their potential use lies, be this as a point to avoid or a point to actively seek out and confine.
TheMadFool May 14, 2020 at 07:14 #412598
This is a perfect example of the mistake of inferring something that is supposed to be universally practised to be good is bad because it leads to an absurdity caused by that something being practised only by some.

The principle not to kill to achieve its full glory in goodness must be practised by all. That some kill doesn't mean the principle is bad.

If everyone engages in philosophy, no one would wage war, Rome would neither have an army and nor would it be under attack.
River Lantzantz May 14, 2020 at 07:51 #412605
Although I do believe certain philosophical ways can be potentially harmful, saying this is very relative in every way possible; it depends on the person, the state of mind when they receive the philosophy, societal influence on the subject, how you define harmful, the option to look at the philosophy from another perspective, etc. I enjoyed how I like sushi said this

Quoting I like sushi
I would argue strongly that any ‘philosophies’ that aren’t potentially harmful are not ‘philosophies’ at all.

Mistakes and faults are a necessary part of active pursuits. ALL activities (‘philosophical’ or otherwise) are potentially dangerous - that is precisely where their potential use lies, be this as a point to avoid or a point to actively seek out and confine.


Trial and error is the best teacher. With philosophy, it is good to look at things from an outside perspective from time to time. To make mistakes presents an opportunity to look at it objectively and learn why what you did was harmful. I also enjoy the thought of Murphy's law, with the inevitability of everything that can possibly go wrong, going wrong, this leads to the most possible opportunities for improvement until we get to the point where nothing can go wrong.
A Seagull May 14, 2020 at 08:23 #412609
The only philosophies that can be harmful are those that are based on lies but claimed to be true.
Outlander May 14, 2020 at 08:29 #412611
Reply to A Seagull

This excludes unintentional fallacies then? How so? Assuming somehow I know for an absolute fact there is an afterlife and say 'there isn't' and someone takes each day much more seriously enriching themselves and their community as a result, is this still harmful?
Pinprick May 15, 2020 at 00:12 #412830
Quoting Pfhorrest
...leading to the conclusion that there are no answers to be found there, and then giving up on the pursuit of them.


Not necessarily. They can continue searching for a refutation for nihilism.

Quoting Pfhorrest
It was doing philosophy unsuccessfully that lead them to that conclusion, sure, but the conclusion itself that they reach is that success there is not possible and striving for it is hopeless, rather than merely that it hasn't been attained yet.


How so? Can one not conclude that nihilism is true by using the same methods as non-nihilists? Also, what do you mean by success? If nihilism is true, wouldn’t discovering this truth be a success? A nihilist can be open to the discovery of new facts that could prove nihilism to be false.
unenlightened May 16, 2020 at 10:16 #413243
Sometimes it is wise to shoot yourself in the foot.

You might face a firing squad for cowardice, but the risks of remaining in the frontline trenches are far greater.

Mind you, this is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury.
Lif3r May 17, 2020 at 05:11 #413468
Philosophy does not equal morality.
Benj96 May 17, 2020 at 15:08 #413588
Philosophy in my opinion is boundless as it is the art of trained thought/ questioning. So can thoughts, ideas and perspectives be harmful? Absolutely. Someone who philosophically settles on the opinion that life is meaningless could be extremely harmed or liberated by that thought.