Dear Amalya Sukiasyan

Hello again, apologies that I'm stalling on my other obligations and side-tracking. You're to blame too though for putting up interesting questions!! (I'm joking)!

On this question, I would like to say that the question should be about philosophy as a practice, as an activity maybe, not to frame it (the question) in epistemological terms. Epistemology is one part of philosophy, however I think the obsession of the 20th century (and now) with it may have dragged on too long and may be diminishing the value of other eras in philosophy. (i think in the 19th century for example they were doing more aesthetics and philosophy of history).

So to come back to your question but being pig-headed and creating problems, I'd like to say that philosophy (not its knowledge) should be a form of therapy, following Wittgenstein :)

What do you think?

Best Wishes,

Haris

Dear Haris Shekeris, thank you for sharing your insights. In this context, philosophical knowledge refers to the type of knowledge that has an existential, epistemological, transcendental, and value-based essence. Philosophy can indeed be a form of meaningful therapy for those who can deal with existential dilemmas, being-related quests, and ontological questioning. For those who are not comfortable with deep-level thinking and fundamental explorations, philosophy can be a form of anti-therapy, full of intellectual suffering and metaphysical boredom.

Dear Amalya Sukiasyan ,

Good morning, I think I should have to agree with you, even though I usually don't like to separate people into categories, even when elegantly and gracefully put :-) - i am half-joking as always :)

Best Wishes,

Haris

I would recommend reading the work of the British Idealists. For a comprehensive discussion of the different aspects of their work related to issues of knowledge, ethics and metaphysics, see my two edited books:

W. J. Mander and Stamatoula Panagakou (eds), British Idealism and the Concept of the Self (London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2016):

Book British idealism and the concept of the self

James Connelly and Stamatoula Panagakou (eds), Anglo-American Idealism: Thinkers and Ideas (Oxford: Peter Lang, 2010):

https://www.peterlang.com/document/1043679

Thanks for the philosophical inquiry.

Dr. Stamatoula Panagakou

It is important to analyse the process of knowledge and not just the judgements that attend given perspectives. Acceptance of any position need only occur after all other possibilities are considered, and even then conditionally

Dear Stanley Wilkin , I guess with 'even then conditionally' you mean conditionally on the consideration of all other possibilities, right? If that's the case, then I guess the question would be, can 'all' other possibilities ever be consider? couldn't there be possibilities which haven't been considered, as in unknown ones?

Best Wishes,

Haris

Haris, conditional to truth, in an exact not a moral sense. i think all these matters must be conditional, devoid of certainty rather than embrace specific viewpoints or answers.

Dear Stanley Wilkin ,

I'm afraid you've lost me there. If you believe in (absolute and easy-to-access) truth, then why do you need to consider all other possibilities? Shouldn't you just consider the truth?

Best Wishes,

Haris

Thank you all for your valuable insights. The essence of philosophical knowledge reflects the multidimensional nature of truth, human existence, and transcendental questioning. As for categorizing people, I think this world is categorized by itself, given ideological, socio-cultural, and psychological differences of individuals and societies. Categorial approach to things and human beings is justified as long as it demonstrates the unique value, enriching essence, and variability of differences.