Bertrand Russell And The Greatest Philosopher

The empiricist following throughout Western philosophy was started by John Locke. In spreading this new idea of learning, he saw his mission as clearing away the metaphysical rubbish left by rationalists which was hindering the path to knowledge. Locke rejected many of the ideas which Descartes fought for. Rationalists claimed there to be two fundamental innate ideas, the logical principles of identity and non-contradiction. Locke argued that for any innate ideas to exist they must be approved by everyone. He decided that a test should be created, thus determining if these ideas reside in the minds of everyone regardless of age or education. In his study he found that these principles, as he suspected, failed to be universally assented.

After reading “Thoughts of the Presence of Fear” by Wendell Berry and “Useless Knowledge” by Bertrand Russell, I found that it is quite evident that the approach of the 2 arguments proposed by the authors are very different. Wendell Berry’s approach is a more negative way because he states the solutions to the given problems, however, they are generalized. He doesn’t really go in depth as to why a certain solution will help or how the solution will lead to a better environment. Rather he mainly states that if we don’t change then it will lead to destruction. On the other hand, Russell incorporates personal experiences in his essay to fully support his argument. An example from the text would be his quote, “Curious learning not only makes unpleasant

He first disproves of the thought that philosophy studies only controversies to which the answer is impossible to know, and says that it will only matter, and have an effect on those who study philosophy for the purpose of gaining knowledge to connect the sciences for an understanding of the universe. Russell then compares a life without philosophy and a life with philosophy, the difference being that a life without philosophy is confined to only thinking of our world, while one who lives a philosophical life is free to think of the outer world, as well as beyond. He concludes by saying philosophy is not studies for the sake of answers, but for the sake of the questions themselves, in order to expand our knowledge of possibilities and intellectual imagination, in addition to understanding the capabilities and greatness of the

Philosophy is defined by Webster as "Love and pursuit of wisdom by intellectual means and moral self-discipline" or "Investigation of the nature, causes, or principles of reality, knowledge, or values, based on logical reasoning rather than empirical methods." This essay is a general look at those who pursued that intellectual means, those who investigated, even those who reasoned Reason. Because volumes could be written and this is a rather quick, unworthy paper: apologizes.

Bertrand Russell was a British philosopher, mathematician, and political activist. He studied philosophy and mathematics in college and was hired to give lectures at Trinity College. When World War I began, so did his political activism. In 1918, he wrote an article criticising the England’s part in the War and promoting peace. As a result, he was sent jail and removed from his position at Trinity. After he was released from jail, he began to travel the world giving lectures, and was eventually accepted back to Trinity. In 1950, he won the Nobel Prize in Literature and continued to give lectures on math and philosophy until his death in 1970. Throughout his life, he argued that war only causes more problems and that peace is the best solution.

Conservatism in the 1950s was also promoted by writers. One of the writers who strongly opposed liberalism was Russell Kirk. Russell’s conservatism was influenced by the fact that he viewed both traditional and modern liberalism as acts that are of great significance as regards economic matters. According to him, liberalism did not take care of spiritual aspects of man. Hence,

Russell was born in 1891. He steered more towards the legislative branch. He served in the public office for 50 years as a U.S. senator, state legislature, and governor of Georgia. He was also a member of the Democrat party. He helped more than 25 facilities to be maintained and facilitated. He supported most New Deal programs. They called him the most powerful and influential man in Washington. He was one of the military and defense experts along with Carl Vinson. He stood firmly on Civil rights. He was the chairman of the Armed Services Committee. He was later on, a leader in the Atomic Energy Commission. He died in 1971 sadly, he died without ever getting married.

In this paper I am going to attempt to answer a question utilizing a little help from one of two philosophers. First of all the question I will be answering is “Should the moral value of an action be determined by the intentions/character that inspire the action, or the consequences that result from the action?” Second, the philosophers I am going to discuss throughout this paper are Immanuel Kant and John Stuart Mill. Now before I tell you my answer to this question I am going to explain these who these two philosophers are and what their viewpoints on ethics are.

A woman similar to his mother played a brief but important role in his life. This person was his grandmother Ida Rebecca. Ida Rebecca and his mother did not pair well mostly because they shared a certain amount of competitiveness. It was this competitiveness that showed Russell exactly what kind of woman Ida Rebecca was. She had a domineering presence that displayed a quaint form of matriarchy over all those around her, not limited to just her children. This power humbled Russell towards adults and caused him to listen more than speak. Ida Rebecca could be considered one of his biggest benefactors. Because of this simple quality of silence she instilled in him, he was able to understand life much better. Obviously, anyone who listens more than speaks is more likely to learn more. Although she was strong, Ida did have some loose ends. She was very superstitious. Everything

Furthermore, Locke’s profound analysis on sources of knowledge contributed to today’s psychological analysis of the unsolved dilemma of nature versus nurture while significantly shaping the foundation of modern psychology. As Locke introduced empiricism in An Essay Concerning Human Understanding, he was an important figure of Enlightenment to foster and alternate the schools of thinking in many spheres including here philosophy and psychology among many others.

Bertrand Russell discussed certain problems he found with philosophy. Russell was concerned about how much did we really know. There is the stuff we know with our mind when we have a particular idea, and stuff we know through actually experiencing it which would justify it. But how do we know if it is real, or even there, for that matter? Russell says, “For if we cannot be sure of the independent existence of object, we cannot be sure of the independent existence of other people’s bodies, and therefore still less of other peoples minds, since we have no grounds for believing in their minds except such as are derived from observing their bodies” (Russell, 47). How can Farmer Brown be sure that the dairyman just didn’t have an idea

Russell was a leader in the revival of the philosophy of empiricism in the large field of epistemology. He wrote Our Knowledge of the External World (1914), The Analysis of Matter (1927) and Human Knowledge, Its Scope and Limits (1948). He also wrote Principles of mathematics (1903), Principia Mathematica (with A.N. Whitehead; three volumes, 1910 – 1913), and Introduction to mathematical Philosophy (1919).

Bertrand Russell’s essay addresses many issues concerning philosophy. In the writing, he states philosophy’s nature, value, and criticisms. The essay explains these aspects of the study of philosophy in relatively different ways. The main idea for establishing value in his essay is by explaining how it is best obtained, and its effect on other people. The essay continues with his criticisms of those who opposed

In Russell’s discussion “The Value of Philosophy,” he asserted that the true goal of Philosophy wasn’t a tangible, or even reachable, goal. He says that Philosophy won’t lead us to any definite answers, because once you acquire solid knowledge of a subject, it instantly becomes another science. Instead that the greatest value of this study comes from the mental freedom you get when you begin to question the status quo and not just accepting things as they are. He also says that questioning these everyday issues will not lead to a solid answer through the use of Philosophy. But those doubts will inevitably open you up to the infinite possibilities that are available in the world that neither you, nor myself would

John Dewey transformed the United States educational system as a philosopher, reformer and psychologist. He published thousands of writings on art, social theory, logic, and ethics, but is best known for his promotion of pragmatism and democracy. His work in the birth of functional psychology made him one of the most cited and influential psychologists in the 20th century.