Philosophical Vocabulary and Identity

In my time in Philosophy classes, and now in research into Philosophy graduate programs, I have encountered many terms peculiar to the philosophical world: epistemology, metaphysics, teleology, metaethics, philosophy of mind, etc.  These terms are brandished in Philosophy classes in ways that suggest that any educated person should know them as a fundamental part of their vocabulary and understanding of the world, especially Philosophy students.  Moreover, when speaking to Philosophy professors, they have often asked me what I want to study, and the answers they seem to expect are these peculiar philosophical terms, then what aspects of these terms I find truly interesting and worthy of in-depth study.  This is, of course, problematic as I’m not always sure what these terms mean, let alone the sub-aspects of the term,  and the professors don’t seem to understand a word I say unless it’s one of these terms.  So if I say, “I’ve always found ethics to be interesting, especially how ingrained they are in society and in people’s paradigms,” I understand what I mean, but to them I have made a statement so alien in its generality that I have said nothing sensical at all.  However, if I say, “I find it interesting how people seem to follow normative ethics by a kind of deontology when it comes to certain notions in applied ethics,” I have said something juicy to their ears that, unfortunately, I don’t understand, despite having said it.  

In a way, it’s almost like the professors I speak to are hoping to establish in their mind who I am, or hope to be, based on my usage of terms.  Which makes me think, “Who am I, in philosophical terms?”  So, I did some research; actually, I “googled” things like, “what is metaphyics?” or “what is epistemology?,” but I’m only looking for basic understanding at this point, so that counts, right?  Unfortunately, I kept getting the atheism entry from About.com on my search results, rather than something more academic.  Besides, I think of myself as a theist of sorts, and I know I am interested in Philosophy of Religion, so a site about atheism doesn’t seem right as a resource for my inquiry into who I am (though it is a valuable resource).  But, I did find some good stuff for epistemology at Yale, a discussion of metaphysics from Stanford by noted philosopher Peter van Inwagen, and a great overview of ethics.  These articles are far too extensive to summarize, but are interesting reads.  Unfortunately, I couldn’t find much of the same for any of the other terms I “googled”: philosophy of mind, Islamic philosophy, and philosophy of religion. So for now, I’ll stick to the three I did find, and try to define myself as an epistemologist, metaphysician, and ethicist.

What I found was a bunch more terms—terms, and sub-terms, each defining a position in the field, and an argument from dichotomous positions.  This was good for my knowledge base.  However dichotomy is bad when it comes to identity, as I find that I embrace both of what appear to be defined as opposites.  How can I embrace both dark and light, good and bad, form and formlessness, coke and pepsi?  Maybe this is what actually defines me philosophically.    I’d like to think so, as I tend to think that any dichotomy is, ultimately, false, but always approach dichotomies in such a way as to try and fully understand both sides, in order to see enlightened middle ground and an escape from dichotomous thinking.  What does all this actually mean?  I have no idea, but am I wrong in thinking that is what I should be finding out in grad school?  At the very least, that is what I will try to figure out in the next few posts.

First Post

Not much to say right now, mostly wanting to test what the blog looks like.

Began reading Philosophy of Religion in the 21st Century the other day.  Basically, it is a survey of the major positions in current philosophy of religion.  Unfortunately, I may have to put it on the backburner for now, as I recently discovered that my GRE skills are lacking.