The Wake

Take my thoughts, experiences and epiphanies and put them in a blender. Turn it on frappe without the lid, on and watch it all splatter in my face like a bad date. Philosophy can have a comparable effect on a student. I walk into discussions hoping that what I’m saying will penetrate the minds of those around me. Perhaps, today my ideas will cause them to sit back and think, “Jesus, how did I think any differently before these wise words?” This rarely happens. In any number of typical classroom settings, if you put enough thought into what you are presenting and have the confidence and credibility to relay it, people may follow. For those who consider themselves extremely persuasive by nature, prepare to die of pure aggravation.

Let me preface this by stating that I find philosophy to be a fascinating study. From the question of God to the reliability of our senses, philosophy is an intriguing subject. However, you must enter with a sense of control. I feel that my opinions have a fair amount of logic to them and don’t carry an immense quantity of irrational beliefs. But why, when I enter this classroom, do I sometimes feel like I’m run over by a huge philosophical steamroller? There are bound to be students who agree with the things I say. Even when I’m not stating my opinion, I feel kind of hypocritical. I begin to feel like the class period basically consists of my thoughts jumping from, “How could you possibly disagree with me, you mongoloid bitch?” to “How could you expect me to possibly agree with you?” Crazy mongoloid bitches.

Let’s take the issue of the existence of God. Esteemed philosophers of the past have argued in favor of God’s existence with the support of fairly sound arguments. But there will always be some loophole in any argument that you present to me. A textbook tells me that God typically fits the description of being omnipotent, omniscient and omnibenevolent. In turn, these characteristics are used tirelessly to discuss God’s existence. You can’t try to convince me of something with supporting points that don’t have any support themselves. Here begins the endless cycle that is philosophy. No matter what you tell me, and no matter what hyper intellectual, well thought out arguments I throw at you, you never seem to agree with me, and we will dance around in a deadly circle of hypotheses.

I honestly see no hope on the horizon. It used to be entertaining to muse about a degree in philosophy. What an abstract and not to mention uncommon pursuit. I just laugh about that proposition now. It’s become painfully clear now. There seems to be little you can do with the degree besides going on to teach the course or actually becoming a philosopher (and how hilarious would that be?). Perhaps the unappealing ways about this study stem from the mere fact that there is an inability to come across any sort of breakthrough. If the entire basis of the study is the theme of endless questions and a lack of answers, where is it going? .

When learning about the conflicting views of philosophers A.J. Ayer and J.L. Austin, people too high-minded and intellectual for the mundane thrill of first names, the class was informed that their differing opinions of the questionable nature of our senses went beyond just the issue itself. I see little purpose in the whole argument because no one has any proof of anything. This is a fairly common trend in philosophical arguments. The entire basis of faith is centered around an internal feeling that doesn’t necessarily rely on scientific equations. But for a realist like myself, you’re going to have to do better than that. I’m well aware that if I follow this thought process, I technically should have no reason to believe what I believe. We all fit into this same frustrating category and that is the reason it is so futile to ever even think about opening my mouth or mind.

However, there are exceptions I must address. I accept that philosophy is beneficial for the growth of thought. It assists in the ability to see things in a new light and conceptualize in abstract ways. No matter if one believes the things one’s classmates say, there is room to grow. I can already see these benefits in myself. This still does not change the fact that regardless of my attempts. I don’t feel satisfied after our discussions. I rely on the possibility to one day show someone that without a doubt what I’m sharing is absolutely true. Without that, I end up feeling defeated, not to mention perturbed by this whole unstable view of things. I suppose I’ll just continue to wallow at my desk, puzzling over “if/then” statements until I’m metaphorically beat-up enough to satisfy the philosophical bully.