2

Philosophy is often considered as the pursuit of wisdom, the love of knowledge, or the quest for truth. However, philosophy relies entirely on language, which is itself a human construct that may not fully capture the reality of things. Language can be ambiguous, vague, misleading, or even contradictory. Moreover, language can also shape our thoughts and perceptions, limiting our ability to think outside the box or question our assumptions. Therefore, I wonder: what is the point of philosophy if it is itself the fruit of words and that therefore is limited? How can philosophy overcome the limitations of language and reach a deeper understanding of the world ? Or is philosophy doomed to be forever trapped in the web of words?

Olandelie
  • 251
  • 7
  • Maybe we can have knowledge and wisdom with introspection/meditation, but how can we communicate it without words? – Mauro ALLEGRANZA Jul 10 '23 at 05:44
  • 1
    Regarding the fact that "philosophy is limited": everything that is human is limited. – Mauro ALLEGRANZA Jul 10 '23 at 06:24
  • 3
    True wisdom can only be communicated through mime. – causative Jul 10 '23 at 06:45
  • Socrates, very much a sophist of his time, disagreed and disapproved of what most contemporary sophists were up to. To distinguish himself from them he added *philos* to *sophos*. Unfortunately in english *philos* translates to love which has inexorable Hollywood associations!! A return to Greek nuance is [possible](https://philosophy.stackexchange.com/a/65091/37256). Keeping an eye on *philos* can help safeguard one against getting caught in word games – Rushi Jul 10 '23 at 07:46
  • 2
    What is the problem with philosophy being limited? No knowledge is infinite. Knowledge is intended to simplify (abstract) the world, not to record everything. – RodolfoAP Jul 10 '23 at 10:14
  • The question answers itself already. As e we are limited in our thoughts by the language, we need to create a language that does not limit us. That's philosophy. – tkruse Jul 11 '23 at 06:26
  • @tkruse - "As e we are limited in our thoughts by the language, we need to create a language that does not limit us. That's philosophy." But there are always limits... thus philosophy tries to understand and "enlarge" the limits of our language. – Mauro ALLEGRANZA Jul 11 '23 at 10:05
  • 1
    @MauroALLEGRANZA: “The limits of my language mean the limits of my world.” –Wittgenstein, TLP – CriglCragl Jul 11 '23 at 11:50
  • 1
    @CriglCragl - yes, and then he spent 30 more years to discuss about language :-) Anyway, see 6.5 "For an answer which cannot be expressed the question too cannot be expressed. The riddle does not exist. If a question can be put at all, then it can also be answered." that is simply wrong: TPL and PI are full of "riddles" and their discussion is illuminating. – Mauro ALLEGRANZA Jul 11 '23 at 11:52
  • "The Tao that can be told is not the eternal Tao; The name that can be named is not the eternal name. The nameless is the beginning of heaven and earth." -Tao Te Ching. See discussion of: https://philosophy.stackexchange.com/questions/82360/philosophers-or-philosophical-traditions-that-reject-symbolic-reasoning/82366#82366 It has been argued that words can take us beyond words, eg: 'Nāgārjuna, Nietzsche, and Rorty’s Strange Looping Trick' https://absoluteirony.wordpress.com/2014/09/17/nagarjuna-nietzsche-rorty-and-their-strange-looping-trick – CriglCragl Jul 11 '23 at 12:00
  • 2
    Gateless gate: https://www.sacred-texts.com/bud/glg/glg43.htm. *Shuzan held out his short staff and said: "If you call this a short staff, you oppose its reality. If you do not call it a short staff, you ignore the fact. Now what do you wish to call this?"* Mumon's comment: *Holding out the short staff, He gave an order of life or death. Positive and negative interwoven, Even Buddhas and patriarchs cannot escape this attack.* I had a mentor who used to call me "The man with no doors." Don't care what he meant! I had vision of floating in the sky and Sunlight flowing from my chest to the earth! – SystemTheory Jul 11 '23 at 15:26
  • There exists a type of western philosophy called *quietism* not depending on words or letters as some special transmission outside interpretative scripting languages where you need a mystical and deeper level native language to learn and practice... – Double Knot Jul 14 '23 at 18:50

3 Answers3

1

Science is also the fruit of words and other limited things, so what's the point of science?

Well, science led to the creation of most things you take for granted in the modern day: computers, modern medicine, modern buildings, electricity, etc.

If you accept that those things are useful, then we agree that something being built on limited concepts doesn't make it pointless.

Much like science, the point of philosophy is to increase and refine our understanding of reality.

NotThatGuy
  • 4,003
  • 13
  • 18
1

philosophy relies entirely on language

No more than other human activities. All human activities requiring the collaboration or cooperation of many people relies "entirely" on language. This includes engineering, science, politics, war, religions, rescue operations in case of major disasters, and, well, social life generally.

Philosophy does not really rely entirely on language. Every philosopher has a personal experience of life and this cannot possibly not decide of his or her philosophy.

How can philosophy overcome the limitations of language and reach a deeper understanding of reality?

If you can't describe it in words, how are you going to explain to others what is your "deeper understanding of reality"?

Speakpigeon
  • 5,522
  • 1
  • 10
  • 22
  • 1
    Your last question leaves a lot to be explained, don't you think? – Ludwig V Jul 11 '23 at 12:19
  • @LudwigV "*Your last question leaves a lot to be explained*" Questions are not meant to explain anything. This one is also transparently rhetorical. We all know the answer because it is obvious. – Speakpigeon Jul 11 '23 at 14:35
  • 1
    Then I guess I made a mistake in answering it. Sorry. I get really torn between the attempts I see to explain the ineffable which are indeed, often absurd, and the idea that language is only meaningful if it is descriptive, which usually means, in philosophical contexts, true or false. That can be very limiting if it is taken too narrowly. Metaphorical and expressive uses of language are just as respectable, in their different ways as descriptive language is. I'm sure you know the answers to all that, but this isn't the place for an extended discussion. So I'll just accept your reply. – Ludwig V Jul 11 '23 at 14:54
0

"what is the point of philosophy if it is itself the fruit of words and that therefore is limited? How can philosophy overcome the limitations of language and reach a deeper understanding of reality? Or is philosophy doomed to be forever trapped in the web of words?"

Three questions that spread over a wide field. You may find some illumination in these articles. Philosophy - Wikipedia or Philosophical method - Wikipedia or Philosophy of language.

You'll find many explanations of what philosophy is, what the point of it is and how it should be done. One that I like is that philosophy is about answering the fundamental questions about life and everything that nobody knows how to answer. But it attempts to do so by rational means, which means that language is the medium of philosophy.

All the arts and sciences employ one medium or another and all of them struggle with the limitations of their medium. Poetry and science, for example, both have to struggle with the limitations of language. The fine arts struggle with the limitations of paint or marble or whatever other media they use; music struggles with the limitations of the standard scale; and so on.

As a result of these struggles, new ways of expressing insights get developed. This involves developing new methods and so there cannot be a method for doing it. Sooner or later, the limitations of the new method become apparent and the struggle begins again.

Looking at it another way, the apparent traps that art and science discovers are not what they are doomed to, but invitations to escape and opportunities to grow and develop.

Ludwig V
  • 2,247
  • 4
  • 22