
- Image via Wikipedia
Back in high school, I was required to take a philosophy course.
My teacher made the following statement, “It has been said that The Western Tradition of philosophy, men sitting around in discussion, is a predatory mechanism.”
This is certainly a curious statement. And I’m not sure it’s limited to the Western Tradition; this could just be an illusion of the way history is recorded.
The statement does not refer to men sitting around plotting strategies of war or something of that nature. The statement refers to discussions that seem to have begun with the likes of Socrates, Aristotle, and Plato.
So what does this have to do with predation? Here’s my theory of why this could be:
Any group of people sitting around discussing deep questions are making connections with each other. Sharing deep personal thoughts requires some level of intimacy. Additionally, discussing such questions also provides a window into the minds of those participating. By listening to you answer tough questions, I’m able to learn something about you: what you value, your motivations, your biases, your weaknesses, your talents, and even your alliances with others involved.
These factors create dense and intelligent connections between people, which are the ingredients for creativity and action.
Here’s another theory as to why this could be true:
Discussions harness collective intelligence and collective creativity. Consequently, they’re meme machines; discussions lead to ideas and attitudes that spread from an epicenter out to a network’s peripheral (and then perhaps amplified by other epicenters).
If you hear about an idea that resonates with you and strikes you as important, you’re likely to share it with others. Shared experience is powerful, and it brings like-minded people together. This creates social alignment–an important part of getting things done at a large scale.
You could say that philosophizing is a means of initiating a community-driven movement, which are capable of quickly accelerating.
The two theories are similar. However, the first is more about the formation of a band of warriors that will take on a mission. The second is about social alignment–which is an advantage harnessed by many species. Both of these could be considered and used for forms of predation.
These are just two theories. There are many others. There are also other interpretations of the statement itself. Perhaps the act of learning itself (which is done through discussion) qualifies philosophizing as a predatory? Perhaps discussion and the resulting debate allows a thought leader to emerge (which could relate to predation on different levels)?
So is it possible philosophizing is an act of predation? What’s your theory?
-Kevin
3.8.2010
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=148a5960-9ff0-4b65-b38c-2d107459791f)

![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=9c171c33-9b61-4d89-bbb3-1a28480dd0e8)

![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=065c0b82-8271-42f6-b811-3bc2d82c4140)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=8907716c-bc47-40d1-bcc7-c98e0ec2e9c7)

![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=562fe2cb-574f-41b5-898d-2436157c1d18)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=f2a2bde6-96f9-42f8-8eb6-bbc0975e8d26)


![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=b7587857-bef8-4788-91db-16d52700fd98)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=e36ba35f-ed13-4bee-a8c2-f4a84e7d7395)



