You can order Greg Johnson’s Tyranny and Wisdom here.

2,627 words

Philosophy is the most important thing you will ever study, but it is easy to get bogged down in asides about the meanings of words. Thus it is helpful to get the basic terminology out of the way first.

It’s All Greek to Us

The European philosophical tradition began in Ancient Greece. Thus we will have to use a few Greek words to explain it. But don’t be intimidated. Since many English words have Greek roots, you have been speaking Greek all along without knowing it.

For instance, the word “philosophy” has Ancient Greek roots: philia means “love” and sophia means “wisdom.” Thus philosophy means the “love of wisdom,” with “love” here meaning “pursuit.” So philosophy is the pursuit of wisdom.

But what is wisdom?

The Greeks understood sophia as a superlative form of knowledge. There are three basic senses in which sophia is superlative.

1. Sophia as Knowledge of the Whole

First, sophia encompasses more than normal knowledge. Indeed, it encompasses “the whole.” It is somehow knowledge of everything.

But wisdom is more than just knowing many things. Philosophers are not walking encyclopedias. They know the whole, but not like scientists or historians know it. Philosophers focus on the forest, not the trees. They take a step back from the details and look at their context.

As Wilfrid Sellars put it, “The aim of philosophy, abstractly formulated, is to understand how things in the broadest possible sense of the term hang together in the broadest possible sense of the term.”

Philosophers also wonder where human beings belong in the big picture. Thus philosophy is a map of the universe with a little “You are here” tag.

2. Sophia as Knowledge of Ultimate Reality

Second, sophia is knowledge of what is most real, which the Greeks identified with the ultimate causes of things. The search for ultimate causes splits off in two directions: natural philosophy, which later became the science of nature, and theology, the quest for rational or experiential (i.e., mystical) knowledge of god.

3. Sophia as Knowledge of the Good

Third, sophia is knowledge of the best, the good. This includes the good for individuals and for society as a whole. This is the realm of moral and political philosophy. The Greeks had a second word for wisdom in the realm of ethics and politics, “phronesis,” which can be translated as “prudence” or “practical wisdom.”

Theoretical vs. Practical Wisdom

At this point, we need to introduce a distinction between two kinds of wisdom: theoretical and practical. The English word “theory” derives from the Greek verb “theorein,” which means “to contemplate.” The English word “practice” comes ultimately from the Greek verb “prattein,” which means “to do” or “to act.”

Practical knowledge is pursued to change the world. Theoretical knowledge is pursued for its own sake, not to do or change anything. Practical knowledge has its “end” or goal outside itself, namely the changes it effects in the world. Theoretical knowledge is an “end in itself.” Practical knowledge is pursued to do work. Pursuing theoretical knowledge is a leisure time activity. Of course theoretical knowledge might have practical applications. But that’s not necessarily why one pursues it.

For instance, there is theoretical physics and applied physics, which consists of a whole array of different technological disciplines: ballistics, hydraulics, mechanical engineering, etc.

In philosophy, we speak of theoretical and practical wisdom. When we encounter a real distinction in the world, it is natural and convenient to use two words to prevent confusion. Thus the Ancients tended to use “sophia” to refer to theoretical wisdom and “phronesis” to refer to practical wisdom. But they were hardly rigorous about it. For instance, the pursuit of both sophia and phronesis was referred to simply as the love of sophia.

The Five Branches of Philosophy

Philosophy is often divided into five branches: Metaphysics, Epistemology, Ethics, Politics, and Aesthetics. If you want one-word accounts of what they study:

Metaphysics: Being
Epistemology: Truth
Aesthetics: Beauty
Ethics: Goodness
Politics: Justice

The word “metaphysics” comes from Aristotle. There is a book by Aristotle called Metaphysics from “ta meta ta physika,” which means “the things beyond the physical.” Aristotle describes metaphysics as the study of the question of “being.” Being has multiple senses, including the things that all particular beings have in common and the ultimate causes of everything. Thus metaphysics is sophia in the first two senses: knowledge of the whole and knowledge of ultimate reality.

The word “epistemology” comes from the Greek “episteme,” which means “knowledge,” and “logos,” which means a “rational account.” So “epistemology” literally means “the rational account of knowledge.” It raises questions like, “How do we know what we know?” One of the most important parts of epistemology is logic, which also comes from “logos.” Logic is the study of good and bad arguments.

The Greek root of “aesthetics” is “aisthesis,” meaning “sensory awareness.” Sensory awareness, of course, is a topic in epistemology, and sometimes “aesthetic” is used in that context. For instance, Immanuel Kant has a section on “Transcendental Aesthetic” in the Critique of Pure Reason. But for the most part, aesthetics refers to the philosophy of beauty, which is first and foremost appreciated through the senses.

Aesthetics is sometimes described as the philosophy of art, but that arbitrarily narrows its scope, for there is natural beauty as well. Thus aesthetics, properly understood, is the philosophy of beauty, both natural and artificial.

The word “ethics” comes from the Greek “ethos,” which means “character” or “habit.” It raises questions like, “What is the good life?” “How do we tell good from evil?” “What makes an act right or wrong?” “What makes a person good or bad?” Another term for ethics is “moral philosophy.” This time the root is Latin, “moralis,” which was Cicero’s translation of the Greek “ethikos.”

The Greek root of political philosophy is “polis,” which refers to the Greek city-state. The basic question is “What is the best form of society?” Justice is the primary virtue of society, injustice the primary vice.

I group metaphysics, epistemology, and aesthetics together because they are primarily theoretical. I group ethics and politics together because they are primarily practical.

Opinion vs. Knowledge

One of epistemology’s most important distinctions is between opinion and knowledge. Opinions are things we believe without adequate justification. Usually, we believe them because other people believe them. Growing up in a society means acquiring opinions. Opinion is the default. It is where we all start. And often, it is perfectly adequate. Opinions—especially longstanding and widespread opinions—often turn out to be true.

How do we determine if our opinions are true? Basically, we must test them against reality, which is often harder than it sounds. Opinions that match reality are true. Opinions that don’t match reality are false. When you determine that your beliefs are true, you have replaced your opinions with knowledge.

Philosophers take great pride in replacing opinions with knowledge. However, opinion is the glue that holds society together. Thus the guardians of social order have always been suspicious of people who want to dissolve society’s bonds and replace them with something new and untried. Moreover, everybody has opinions, but knowledge is reserved for only a few. It is natural, however, for people to be suspicious of this new, self-proclaimed elite.

 Should Philosophy Rule?

Ordinary people annoy philosophers by calling them “opinionated.” But philosophers are definitely highly judgmental and critical, and yes, “critique” comes from Greek too, specifically the verb “krinein,” which means to distinguish, separate, or judge.

When we judge something, we set ourselves above it and look down on it. Since philosophy deals with everything, it judges everything, thus it looks down on everything.

Metaphysicians operate with such distinctions as reality and illusion, being and non-being, being and becoming, and various fundamental kinds of being. Epistemologists operate with such distinctions as truth vs. falsehood and knowledge vs. opinion. Aesthetics is primarily concerned with the distinction between beautiful and ugly. Ethics focuses primarily on the distinction between good and bad. Political philosophy focuses primarily on justice and injustice.

Naturally, if you have confused any of these distinctions or fall on the wrong side of them, philosophers will let you know.

There are experts in many different fields. Their expertise makes them authorities. Kings are experts in statecraft. Doctors are experts in medicine. Lawyers are experts in law. Etc. Experts in one field will defer to experts in another. Even kings follow the orders of their doctors.

But the expertise of philosophers is all-encompassing: reality as such, truth as such, beauty as such, goodness as such, justice as such. These categories apply to everything. Thus philosophy sits in judgment of everything.

Metaphysics can declare whole domains “unreal.” Epistemology can declare arts and sciences groundless and irrational. Ethics can declare certain activities evil. Political philosophy can declare them unjust. Aesthetics can unmask their ugliness.

Thus philosophy has the power to challenge and impeach all lesser authorities. Philosophy can upend all hierarchies. Thus not just political philosophy, but all philosophy, is inherently political. When Socrates suggested that philosophers should be kings, he wasn’t joking around. Philosophers certainly act like kings when it comes to arts, sciences, and practical life.

What Sort of Philosophy Should Rule?

The different branches of philosophy can also criticize one another. The metaphysician will look at his colleagues’ arguments and say, “Interesting, but is it real?” The epistemologist will look at his colleagues’ findings and wonder, “But is it true?” The moral philosopher can ask if a theory is good. The political philosopher can ask if theories are just. Finally, it turns out that philosophers are surprisingly receptive to aesthetic evaluations of their ideas. An “elegant” argument is more persuasive than a messy one.

So there is politics even within the philosophical fraternity. The basic division is between philosophers who put the theoretical pursuit of truth above everything and those who put the moral pursuit of the good above everything. Theoretical philosophy can criticize the truth of moral theories, just as moral philosophy can criticize the goodness of theory and its findings. But what is the highest form of wisdom: theoretical (sophia) or practical (phronesis)?

Philosophy as Pure Theory: Science

some philosophers can pursue purely theoretical questions in philosophy seemingly without impacting how they lead their lives at all.

The earliest Greek philosophers were primarily interested in nature and were unconcerned with practical matters. Thus Thales, the very first Greek philosopher, is said to have been so fascinated with the heavens that he did not notice that he was walking into a well.

Naturally, metaphysics and epistemology lend themselves best to this sort of approach. It is hard to imagine studying aesthetics without developing one’s tastes, even accidentally. The same is true of ethics and political philosophy. It seems scarcely possible that one can study them while remaining completely unaffected in one’s moral and political choices.

Nevertheless, there are philosophers who fit this description perfectly. Anglo-American analytic philosophy makes pure theory into an ethos by aping the natural sciences. Just as no scientist is transformed by his work as an entomologist or botanist, one’s metaphysical or ethical research should leave one’s life unchanged. Thus, to signal his detachment from his purely theoretical work, the analytic philosopher aspires to complete philistinism in his ordinary life and tastes. Basically, that means following whatever opinions are dominant.

Philosophy as Impure Theory I: Salvation

Some schools of ancient philosophy embraced purely theoretical studies for practical ends: basically therapy or salvation.

For instance, the Pythagorean school believed that the soul was trapped within the material world—including the human body—where it suffered. To liberate the soul from suffering, the Pythagoreans turned away from the needs of the body and strengthened the soul with theoretical studies like pure mathematics, the more remote from bodily needs, the better.

The Epicurean school believed that mankind was oppressed by belief in gods. Thus they taught a materialist theory of the cosmos that undermined religious belief.

 Philosophy as Impure Theory II: The Gentleman Scholar

Another defense of theoretical philosophy is to laud it precisely because it is useless. For the ancient Greeks, the hallmark of the wealthy gentleman was freedom from economic necessity. This freedom took the form of leisure, which was a prerequisite for theoretical studies. Another manifestation of the gentleman’s freedom from necessity was his cultivation of luxury. Luxuries consist of beautiful and useless things. Basically, the whole realm of high culture began as beautiful and useless things cultivated by the rich. Thus the accusation that theoretical philosophy is “useless” simply recommends it to aristocratic types.

For more about this model of philosophy, see my essay on Plato’s Lovers.

Philosophy as Moral Wisdom

For Socrates as depicted in Plato’s dialogues, wisdom is ultimately moral and practical. Socratic wisdom is the ability to make right use of all things in the pursuit of happiness.

Because wisdom is practical, Socrates constantly likens it to “arts,” i.e., technical skills: medicine, shoemaking, navigation, etc., because they are practical as well. The Greek word for a technical skill is “techne” (plural: “technai”). It is the root of words like technique and technology.

Wisdom differs from technical skills in two important ways. First, every technical skill is specialized, whereas wisdom deals in some way with all things. Second, every technical skill is morally neutral, meaning that the same skills can be used to do good or evil, whereas wisdom is not morally neutral. Instead, wisdom uses things “rightly,” because at its root, wisdom can distinguish between good and evil based on knowledge of human nature.

Technocracy as Counterfeit Wisdom

Arts like medicine and navigation are specialized. But there are more general arts. For instance, stonemasons and carpenters are specialized. But the architect makes use of stonemasons, carpenters, and other artisans to create buildings. Singers, dancers, and musicians all have specialized arts. But the composer or conductor can make use of all of them. The art of rhetoric can be applied to any art to sell it. Similarly, perhaps there is a “kingly” art that can preside over all the arts and all of society. In ancient Greek democracies, the art of rhetoric was the main route to political power, meaning that it was closely aligned with the art of rulership. There’s a name for a system ruled by experts with technical skills: technocracy.

Technocracy certainly seems like wisdom. For one thing, it is comprehensive. Moreover, it is practical. For another thing, it treats its expertise as a title to rule. But technical skills are morally neutral. Thus even the most comprehensive technical skills fall short of true wisdom. The technocrat is not the philosopher king.

These issues are explored in my essays on Plato’s Gorgias, Charmides, and Lovers.

I should note that, although technocracy is not philosophy, philosophy can still be bullish on technology. Indeed, the dual thrust of modern philosophy from the sixteenth to the nineteenth centuries has been (1) the political emancipation of man from man and (2) the use of science and technology to conquer nature to better meet human needs.

What is True Wisdom?

So is true wisdom theoretical or practical? Ultimately, I side with Plato.

Plato believes that wisdom is unconditionally good. There’s never a situation in which you would regret being wise. You can never have too much wisdom for your own good.

But can you have too much knowledge for your own good? Can you be too caught up in theory for your own good? Can some of the discoveries of science be bad for us? If so, then, theoretical knowledge is not unconditionally good. It is good only if used rightly. It needs (practical) wisdom to manage it. Thus theoretical knowledge is not wisdom. The only unconditionally good knowledge is knowledge of the good itself, which is the root of practical wisdom.