To get answer of interest

To express feelings

To create point for discussion

To support your thoughts

Dear Mahhav,

"What would be main four goals of Philosophy?"-- You ask

On my views, the main four goals of philosophy would be the following:

1) To reflect on ontological questions (e.g., why live) and questions having to do with values, ethic and morality (e.g., Why be moral?).

2) To foster one's critical thinking such that people do not become conformist and prone to accept ready made or established truths imposed on them from outside.

3) To perform conceptual investigations or clarifications and, hence, to prepare the terrain for scientists to do their empirical job in an atmosphere of conceptual clarity. For example, the Austrian philosopher of language Ludwig Wittgenstein thought of himself as a conceptual therapist such that scientists' thinking is not bewitchedd by their language. For example, he astutely remaked that in psychology there are experimental methods and conceptual confusion. Needless to say, an experiment run in an atmosphere of conceptual confusion rarely, if ever, clarifies anything.

4) To pursue the true, the good and the beautiful. For example, the German philosopher Immanuel Kant dedicated his Critique of Pure Reason to the pursuit of the true; his Critique or Practical Reason to the pursuit of the good; and his Judgement Critique to the pursuit of the beautiful and the sublime in aestehtical terms.

You also asked the follwing:

"How to Describe thinking and Behave?" As I see it, thinking is often is a form of covert behavior.

"In what extent understandind behave?" I believe that undesrtanding is also generally a form of covert behavior.

"How to Predict the Outcomes?" I am of the opinion that one predicts outcomes based on the variables of which outcomes are a funtion.

"The Controlling and People react?" People often react negatively when they think that they are being controlled, say, by a power agency.

I hope I has got your question and that this helps.

Kind regards,

Orlando

Dear Madhav Prasad Koirala

I would say 4 main goals of philosophers are:

(1) to try to put things together (or make discriminations) using, VERY TYPICALLY A CLEARLY OVERLY DISCONNECTED MIND, lacking real, clear, unambiguous phenomenological referents -- YET impressing and convincing others anyway: Thinking they are better than many others ("all over the place") -- over-generalizing is a hallmark.

(2) to support "me"

(3) to support "myself"

(4) to support "I"

(i.e. there is always a vested interest within the thought, as presented (overall) -- so it is skewed and nonsense when/as overapplied, as it IS)

Philosophers support "naming or declaring things" as a way to make them central, special, or real or distinct; philosophy supports countless false dualisms, that have ruined some science (psychology) for over a century (I have cited many such dualisms (and those as being FALSEHOODS), in my writings)). [ It is not an accident that MOST philosophers, nowadays, align themselves with/in some subject matter -- and then declare that they are "analytic philosophers" (it is about the only way to avoid shame or ridicule, and to have a position -- a job) . ] -->

Some do help out others significantly, but it is MORE than questionable whether this really has anything to do with their "philosophy" or ANY "philosophy", as it "distinguishes" itself from other things. (You will never find a philosopher who has disproven this questionability.)

P.S. I have realized that inevitably and in effect (and not to my credit), I am a philosopher (mostly a negative side effect of having to counter philosophers). BUT, this is not all I am and I always have any seeming operational "philosophy" superseded. I am a stanch science person, forwarding DIRECT OBSERVATION OF IMPORTANT OVERT BEHAVIOR (phenomenon) -- all agreeable upon (with hypotheses that are clearly understood and testable (verifiable/falsifiable)). That is ALL (and I mean that) -- as far as communication is concerned. Empiricism is not a choice, but a necessity.

P.P.S. "Metaphysics" (as typically 'discussed') refers to nothing real, nothing useful. If I had never heard any discussion of "metaphysics", I would be better for that. This is a prime example of the nonsense.

Epistemology. To fully investigate the nature of knowledge, why it exists, what does it do, why is it necessary. It is not simply about constructing data, creating typology, to fasten thoughts and emotions on. It is connected to our essential natures (whatever thst is and means.)

Happiness, Success, Meaning, and Integrity are four goals of philosophy.