Who is a philosopher?

If one wants to become a nurse, he must enrol himself in nursing course. If one wants to be a teacher, he must take up the course of education. This procedure is the same with other courses one desires. And in becoming a philosopher, taking up that discipline or not may not be necessary.

Philosophy course is a professional course. But when one has the chance to look into the history of philosophy, numerous philosophers were not graduates in such course, and their followers have made their names great. What makes them as such?

Philosophers of old did not aspire to make their names great. It was their disciples and students adhere to their ideas. They have discovered that their ideas provide satisfactions to their personal and social queries. We have such examples like Plato who make his teacher Socrates known by making him one of the characters in his writings or Immanuel Kant’s admiration to seek more metaphysical principle by the thoughts of David Hume.

Two things, as I see it, common from these thinkers. First, it is their quest for answers to the very fundamental questions that every ordinary human being encounters. These questions have kept on appearing in their minds. And each has their own styles in approaching those questions. Thus no two thinkers have the same answers. And the second thing is their sense of awe and wonder on why things around them seem to be acting in particular and strange ways. In short, they try to explain the phenomena by using their thinking skills.

Each person is gifted with rationality. And from this inherent gift, he can impregnate unique ideas. There are as many ideas as there are many thinkers trying to answer those questions. But sad to say, no amount of brilliant ideas or simple as it may, has ever met with satisfaction. We are tantamount to say that the fundamental and philosophical questions are enveloped with the sense of mystery. And satisfaction comes only when thinkers are able to unveil that sense of mystery that surrounds them, and point to thoughts beyond appearance and sense impression. And, I believe, this is the secret on becoming a philosopher.

On Arête and Hubris

The Greeks in the ancient period have many characteristics, and one of them is their “Will to Power.” This will to power once interpreted as ‘might is right theory’ that results to domination over the weak, and their subjection to the powerful. Later, Friedrich Nietzche adopted the ‘will to power’ idea in his understanding of man, as a means or capacity to withstand amidst the reality of ugliness and sufferings of life.

The concept of the ‘will to power’ is not free of criticisms from the philosophers at that time. Plato, for instance, speaks against it when people think about domination that leads to destruction. This may be taken from the vantage view of politics. But what about putting the concept in psychological viewpoint? In their culture and character, it shows the two sides of the ‘will to power.’

The first is the exercise of moderation, and it is sometimes called arête, which means the ability to achieve success. The second is the side of excess. It is sometimes called hubris, which means that one is possessed the unbridled lust for self-assertion.

What is laudable between the two for some of the Greeks is the arête, because there is the exercise of temperance and self-discipline as human virtues. It appears in many of the ancient art works the picture of Apollo symbolizing arête, as opposed to Dionysius the Elder and the Younger, the symbols of hubris, with their limitless and lust for self-assertion. They were both tyrants of Syracuse of Italy around 4^th to 3^rd century BC.

The Greeks later created the Olympian dream-world as police, watching over the people to observe arête than hubris. This means that when one is being caught of transgressing his limit or going beyond moderation, the gods would get wrath over him.

Sources: Copleston, Frederick, S.J. A History of Philosophy. Vol. 1 Greece and Rome, and Microsoft Student 2008