akiojafkjawerism

this is what I am thinking about: as we build up our world views, do we fit into some philosophical box of which we aren't aware? by that i mean, if we were to step back and write down a list of examples of how we act or what we believe, could we then draw a conclusion like "oh i subscribe to the constructivist theory of learning." my instinctive response would be to say, to hell with categorizing but this begs some interesting questions.

first, on the level of the personal, it can potentially make you feel more connected to others if you realize that the ideals and principles which you have constructed from your experiences are similarly held by others. more than that, they are held by enough others that someone named an entire school of thought/theory after them. cool. you've participated in some shared aspect of the human experience. from the very personal (after all, no one experiences what you do) you have arrived at something macro-humanular.

second, it poses questions about the validity of having schools of thought or theories. is it valid to make an all-encompassing statement like "I am an Objectivist" without considering that perhaps in some aspects your approach to life could be more of a different school of thought? Here are the Top 10 Schools of Philosophy, as according to listverse, btw:

1. Solipsism - subjective reality; everyone's perception of the world is unique to them, nothing outside of your mind exists with certainty

2. Determinism - humans have free will, but you start a chain of actions and there's only one possible result from all the choices you make along the way 

3. Utilitarianism - morality of a choice is determined by how much good it can do "greatest good to the greatest number" 

4. Epicureanism - pursue pleasure = purpose of existence 

5. Positivism - you have to have evidence through the scientific method to believe things

6. Absurdism - there's no point trying to find meaning, although it may exist

7. Objectivism - abi. rage. 

8. Secular humanism - there is no god, everything is understood in human terms

9. Nihilism - life is meaningless

10. Existentialism - everyone finds their own meaning. the catch-all of philosophy. also, it's ironic because apparently existentialism is "the refusal to belong to any school of thought, the repudiation of the adequacy of any body of beliefs...dissatisfaction with traditional philosophy as superficial, academic, and remote from life" and yet it is a school of philosophy with its own body of beliefs. hypocrite, existentialism! you're the hipster kid buying $90 jeans with authentic rat holes in them! but i like you. 

anyway, now that i've probably lost the attention of all four people who maybe reading this, i can go on my rant more. does subscribing to one school of thought necessarily exclude you from being in another? it does sounds like philosophers would say that's true: certainly you can't be epicureanistic and nihilistic - because the definition of one is "the meaning of life is to pursue pleasure" and the definition of the other is "there is no meaning of life." but it's a little vague how existentialism differs from secular humanism differs from solipsism; there could be overlap among them. therefore, i feel like they aren't mutually exclusive. but that in itself could be a school of thought:


Articulated Confusion - the school of thought wherein you can belong to more than one school of thought; schools of thought are meaningless.


thus we run into the same problem as existentialism, which is a designation that rejects itself. it must be nice to be able to firmly say, I Am An Absurdist. it must be somewhat akin to saying I Am A Catholic. categorization feels so much cleaner. it is nice to say what things definitively are but at the same time my brain knows there's value in not labeling something. i'm running out of steam now, so i'll stop. it's also a beautiful cold day and if you read this, may you enjoy it.


http://listverse.com/2007/11/24/top-10-schools-of-philosophy/