Betrand Russell: The Problems Of Philosophy Essay, Research Paper

Betrand Russell: The Problems of Philosophy

The value of Philosophy is, in fact, to be sought mostly in its uncertainness.

The adult male who has no tincture of Doctrine goes through life imprisoned in the

biass derived from common sense, from the accustomed beliefs of his age or

his state, and from the strong beliefs which have grown up in his head without the

co-operation of his deliberate ground. Bertrand Russell, The Problems of

Doctrine.

Doctrine is normally thought of as an activity reserved for Oxbridge high-

foreheads ; or a kind of rational table-tennis indulged in by the Ancient Greeks

to while the clip away before telecasting came along. Russell suggests that it

may really function a intent for everyone.

In the first line, Russell is clearly contrasting his ain belief in the inherent

uncertainness of doctrine with the attitude of those people who dedicate their

lives to a hunt for the & # 8220 ; right & # 8221 ; theory, in an effort to understand the

& # 8220 ; truth & # 8221 ; about human nature. He argues that, were a philosopher to compose the

perfect, unanswerable theory, the solution to life, the existence and everything,

so doctrine would itself go responsible for bring oning the really mental

indolence which it should assist us to avoid.

Disagreement and argument between the disciples of rival theories is, furthermore,

indispensable to the wellness of doctrine. Just as many major progresss of scientific discipline

are catalysed by war, so the great rational penetrations are sparked by

treatment. If there were cosmopolitan understanding on one philosophical theory, so

all farther idea would be rendered useless. ( See p.319, Small World by David

Lodge: & # 8220 ; ? what matters in the field of critical pattern is non truth but

difference. If everybody were convinced by your statements, they would hold to make

the same as you and so there would be no satisfaction in making it. & # 8221 ; )

Russell negotiations of three different factors involved in the formation of bias.

Each is considered in item below.

The first type of bias is derived from common sense. This is interesting:

it appears that Russell is proposing that common sense is to be avoided. The

Concise Oxford Dictionary defines common sense as & # 8220 ; sound, practical sense,

particularly in mundane affairs & # 8221 ; . In theory, any sound sense is to be welcomed,

where appropriate ; the differentiation to be made here is between using common

sense to mundane jobs, which Russell would surely non rede against, and

taking it out of context as a set of regulations which can be followed without any

farther thought, no affair what the fortunes. For illustration, if you are

experiencing hungry, and you are keeping a biscuit, so a philosophical argument is

non required to make the decision that you eat the biscuit: it & # 8217 ; s common sense.

Fair plenty ; but if there is so a argument on the job of famishment in

Africa, and you were to state: & # 8220 ; We should evidently roll up nutrient to direct to the

hungering people ; it & # 8217 ; s common sense. & # 8221 ; so you would be taking the simple biscuit

determination out of context and into an country where many factors must be considered,

such as whether short term nutrient assistance would forestall the people of Africa from

making a long term solution to their jobs. So Russell is non reasoning

against common sense per Se ; what he is warning against is the replacing of

careful concluding with a system of ready responses that masquerades as common

sense, to supply

an alibi for non believing.

The beginnings of the 2nd type of bias responsible for our imprisonment are

& # 8220 ; the strong beliefs which have grown up in one & # 8217 ; s mind without the co-operation of

one & # 8217 ; s deliberate ground & # 8221 ; . These strong beliefs occur partially as a effect of the

societal conditioning ( or & # 8220 ; brainwashing & # 8221 ; ) which, whether consciously devised or

non, seems to be the inevitable consequence of instruction in a large-scale society

such as our ain. A effect of this conditioning is the inclination to na? vety

and an unquestioning credence of anything taught as fact, which is present, in

changing grades, in all school departers in our society.

The success with which this sodium? vety is later shaken off, and the

opposition that an person shows to farther brainwashing from such beginnings as

the Sun newspaper, both depend, harmonizing to Russell, on the grade of exposure

to doctrine. I believe that this stands up to scrutiny: for illustration, alumnuss

of university are highly improbable to read the Sun ; the exposure to a clime

of utmost rational freedom ( pupils are frequently the chief advocates of

alteration to the position quo ) makes the alumnuss resistant to the blatantly

manipulative articles. I do non wish to come in into the argument on whether

rational freedom is of all time come-at-able, or whether it is ever an semblance ;

the fact remains that the ability to oppugn evident truths will be aided by

the survey of, or exposure to, doctrine. ( For it is clearly non merely those who

hold sat in a category entitled & # 8220 ; doctrine & # 8221 ; that have had a & # 8220 ; tincture & # 8221 ; of it. )

Mention of the fleeceable Sun reader raises the inquiry of what is incorrect with an

unthinking but contented life. I would reason that nil is incorrect with such a

life, provided it is genuinely contented. I think Russell believed that cipher could

be content with an unreflective life. This subject is explored in many literary

plants and novels, e.g. Huxley & # 8217 ; s Brave New World, and Willy Russell & # 8217 ; s Educating

Rita.

Third, there are biass derived from & # 8220 ; the accustomed beliefs of our age or

our state & # 8221 ; . These include the biass people are familiar with, such as

racism or sexism, and an every bit of import, but less obvious group of

biass: those caused by equal force per unit area & # 8211 ; e.g. if you move to Saudi Arabia as

a kid, there will be strong force per unit area on you to go a follower of Islam.

It is clear to me that Russell was something of a cynic, at least where popular

sentiment was concerned. He is recommending that you be really careful of the

purportedly obvious, or of anything that is accepted as fact merely because it is

repeated on a regular basis & # 8211 ; truisms and mantras should be subjected to your ain

personal examination before you accept them.

The & # 8220 ; imprisonment & # 8221 ; referred to in the 2nd line is the loss of mental freedom,

a consequence of both keeping the biass discussed in item above, and of the

deficiency of a philosophical position which would let you to recognize and

inquiry these biass. This is, in fact, a description of the & # 8220 ; unthinking

human & # 8221 ; discussed above. He is kindred to a drone bee or a worker emmet, obeying

orders blindly and working mindlessly.

What sets Homo sapiens apart from other species is the ability to oppugn the

universe in which it lives. Philosophy has a critical R? lupus erythematosus to play in the lives of all

work forces, enabling them to gain this ability: it serves as an counterpoison to the

& # 8220 ; biass, accustomed beliefs and strong beliefs & # 8221 ; which threaten their mental

freedom.