Attitudes Toward Philosophy as it is Encountered by American Working Class

Philosophy is a subject that is not well received in American society. It is seen as a waste of time. Its usefulness is brought into question constantly. Attitudes toward philosophy are so hostile that even mentioning one of the major thinkers, will result in the end of a conversation.

These sentiments probably stem from the country's Protestant origins. The Protestant ideology is centered around work and worship. Blind faith is central to the Protestant belief system. In blind faith there is a blatant disregard for questioning and critical thinking. This disregard is seen in the disdain for philosophic pursuit.

Ultimately, philosophy is seen as unproductive. People of these protestant societies usually say: "Philosophy can only be taught, it cannot produce any goods or services." This shows America's attitude toward philosophy and pedagogy. Teachers are a means to a degree, they only produce agents of production. Teaching philosophy has no production value, as it will only create more philosophy teachers.

A blog for the sake of Spring Break Blogging

Philosophy is enriching. It enriches reading comprehension, and gives a profound perspective on the way the world "is." Philosophers are our conduit to the way the world operates. Philosophers observe the world and derive hypotheses about that which they observe. Philosophers such as Nietzsche and Camus explictae things beautifully. Others, such as Heidegger and Althusser, use very strange language that convalutes their overall point.

Conter-Productiveness in the Classroom

In my six years as an undergrad, I have come across all types of counter productive forces in the classroom. As I pay, from my own pocket, two-thousand dollars a semester, I feel it would be appropriate to address these different forms of counter-production. There are three types of counter productiveness they are: bad professors, loud campuses, and annoying students.

I have yet to come across the first variety at SJSU. However, fellow students have confided in me, and I have deduced three different types of bad professors. The first type is the authoritarian professor. This type of professor is counter-productive because they are more concerned with sustaining a self-inflated self-image than helping students learn. This type of professor will change test dates on impulse, neglect any margin of personal error,and treat the students as less-than-animals. Another type is the older than dirt professor. This type of professor means well, but is counter-productive as they are too senile to remember when the class ends, whether or not the students have done an assignment already, or that the curriculum has changed since they had attended college. The third type is the overburdening professor. This type of professor also means well, but neglects that the students have other classes, a job, and a necessity to eat and sleep. These three types of counter-productive professors are rare but can damage a GPA.

Another form of counter-productivity, in college, is the campus itself. It is almost always in the form of a noisy environment. This can stem from protest, which could help contribute to a more productive learning environment, but can ruin the content for that day; fraternity activity, wherein the word "bro" is yelled after every other word, which is usually followed by a profanity; or, the worst kind, the one that has a crappy band play every Thursday. I have experienced all three of these types of noisy campuses, at CSUN in Los Angeles. SJSU doesn't have a prominent noisy campus problem.

The third, and most prominent, type of counter-productivity is the annoying student. There are three classifications of this type of counter-productivity. The first type is the unintentional annoyer. This type of student either breaths too loud, consistently forgets to turn off his/her cell phone, pops bubble gum, clicks pens, or snores in class. Another type is the argumentative student. This student feels he/she is intellectual equal of the professor and is entitled to argue every point the professor makes. The third and final type of counter-productive student has plagued the class room since the dawn of pedagogy, that of the class-clown. This type of student feels it necessary to make annoying quips in order to make his or herself feel important, they make comments that are rarely relevant, and mark students papers with annoying comments during class time. This type of student engages in high school bull shit on a collegiate level, and forces his/her fellow students to be subject to their behavior.

These three types of counter-productivity permeate through all aspects of collegiate life. They make the serious student feel disenfranchised and disrespected. Either, through lack of responsibility, poor self imagery, or plain stupidity these types of counter productivity have made their way into the milieu of academia and brought it to lower and lower standards. We, as students, have a unique opportunity to be autonomous and responsible in the university system. We also have the opportunity to reduce these counter-productive forces that have exposed themselves to us. All it requires is recognition that there is a time and a place for our little annoying traits, argumentativeness, and foolishness, and it is not in class.

The Necessary Conditions for a Paradigm Shift

Thomas Kuhn's theory of paradigm shifts has probably already been applied to the political sphere. In fact, Kuhn's paradigm shifts sound a lot like Hegel's dialectical process. Even still, by looking at our paradigm, under Kuhn's terms, we may be able to see whether or not we are heading toward a "paradigm shift."

A paradigm, according to Kuhn, is a whole way of doing science. It is the way in which claims can be made and analyzed. An example of a paradigm would be the ptolemiac model of the universe, wherein the earth was at the centre of the universe. Here we have a theory in place, where other scientists can use this model to collect information and postulate theories about the structure of the universe.

The ptolemiac model was thrown out when Copernicus said the sun was at the centre of the universe. So, these paradigms change. It is the events that lead up to this change that we need to examine.

Each paradigm tries to perpetuate itself, by doing tests that would strengthen the overall theory. But, these attempts usually discover a problem with the theory as a whole. In ptolemy's case, it was the discovery of retrograde motion, and a questioning of the authority of the church, that inspired people to reject this theory.

Are there cases like these in our present political or economic sphere? clearly, the economic situation shows there are problems with the economic paradigm. The way these markets crash, the fact that people are being laid off and homes are being foreclosed, shows the utter instability of the economic system. So, we have signs that the economic factors have been thrown into doubt.

The political sphere is also being speculated. The governments power may be total, but the people are questioning the government's interests. Overwhelming aid is given to these fallen big businesses, while the average working man is left to struggle. This shows that the average working man is being neglected, and this throws the political ideology of democracy, "a government for the people, and by the people," into doubt.

This is some shallow evidence that we are heading toward a paradigm shift. But, there is another thing necessary for a shift to take place, according to Kuhn. An alternative theory is necessary, one that accommodates the shortcomings of the old paradigm, as in the Copernican theory replacing the Ptolemiac. Unfortunately, this can not be found in or politic and economic situation. There is some discussion of alternate paradigms, but there is no movement toward this alternative theory. It would seem that we are doomed to go through these market crashes, and the governments backing of these failed big businesses, every decade or so, until we can posit an alternate form of political and economic structure.