I'll skip the introductions and jump right into my ideals. Besides, the best way to know someone is finding out what they believe they know.
In my ancient philosophy course at Baylor, we started the year with Hesiod and Homer. That is to say, we read enough of their works to know where they were coming from. We also got an introduction to David Roochnik, the author of our text book Retrieving the Ancients and found out what he thinks of Hesiod and his myths. Now I've only read the first 17 pages, but I think I'm going to like this Roochnik character. There is one big point that we both agree on, myths are not philosophy.
In his text Roochnik started off by saying that in the west, philosophy started with Thales because Thales correctly predicted an eclipse in 585. At first I was confused. What does an eclipse have to do with philosophy? If Thales had discovered the meaning of life he would have had something. As I read on and reflected on the reading it became clearer. Philosophy isn't just unknown questions, its answers too. Of course, unless you're in my head that last statement makes little sense, so I'll explain.
When I see the word philosophy I think of it in the today's sense which is finding answers to questions like "What it the reason for life?" or "What does it mean to be moral?" Basically, philosophy’s finding the answer to questions that don't seem to have answers. What I forget is that the unanswered questions of today are not the same as the questions of 585. Whereas today I would classify the cycle of solar eclipses as science back then it was a mystery. They didn't have NASA around to tell them it was simply the moon trying to upstage the sun, and I'm sure there were a whole lot of Homers and Hesiods around saying the gods are doing it. What separated Thales from the rest is that he didn't settle for some casual explanation. Anyone could take an afternoon to make up a story, say the Muses told them, and go on about their day. But Thales didn't. He went after the truth because he was a lover of truth, a lover of knowledge, a lover of wisdom. Now that we have the answer, it's easy to say that an eclipse falls under the rim of science, but back then it was just as perplexing as the meaning of life. As a question without an answer, it fell (and still falls) under philosophy. That's what I mean when I say philosophy is unknown questions AND answers because it includes the answers to questions previously unknown.
To bring my wondering mind back to the point of this post, I am a philosopher and not a storyteller because I, like Thales, search for truth. Homer and Hesiod were storytellers, Hesiod especially. For class we read lines 1-139 of Hesiod's Theogony. This guy starts off by saying that this story isn't his own, but rather it was given to him by the Muses. I'm not sure about the rest of the world, but if someone's telling me a story and starts off by saying his beliefs are not his own, but something he heard from a mythical creature in the middle of a field somewhere, I'm thinkin' shady. To make it worse, these very same Muses told Hesiod they could be just as soon be lying as telling the truth. This is quintessential storytelling. Roochnik put it well when he wrote, "By invoking the Muses the poet [Hesiod] denies ultimate responsibility for, and therefore knowledge of, his own poem." It's as though Hesiod was adding that disclaimer you find at the front of fictional novels saying all of the characters of the story are the product of the author (the muses) whether or not they reflect the real world. Hesiod was simply the publisher.
The difference in a philosopher is there is no disclaimer. When a philosopher tells you something they are taking full responsibility over what they say, be it right or wrong. They don't feel a need to disconnect themselves from the belief by saying they heard it somewhere else because what their telling you isn't something they just made up. Where a storyteller comes up with an answer, a philosopher finds an answer. They search for what they want to know. Even when they think they have it right, they give their new found answer careful consideration and, if possible, testing before they share it. That's why when Thales predicted the eclipse he was christened a philosopher. It was obvious he had thought about and discovered the eclipse’s true cause as opposed to just coming up with something.
Every question won't be as black & white as "What is the cause of a solar eclipse?” Inquiries about the source of a person's moral or ethics for instance are quite gray. You can't determine if your answer is right by simply looking at the sky. So how does one consider and test these answers to ensure that they are philosophizing, and not just telling stories? By sharing what they know, without qualification. You know you're talking to a philosopher when they will willingly take responsibility for their answers and tell you where they're coming from. Not only that, but if you expose a flaw in their reasoning, their answer changes. Some people call this wishy-washy, but I call it smart. If you find out something you believe to be true is in fact not, why would you continue believing it? That's just stupid.
I end this post by saying, I am a Philosopher. What I post I have considered, if possible tested, and take full responsibility for. If you leave a comment that exposes a flaw in my thinking, I revise my thought and thank you for making me that much closer to the truth.
