Old books versus the Internet

I suspect everyone tries in their own way to make sense of their life. The day-to-day parade of events does not come with a built in explanation. Birth, childhood, a job, marriage, children, retirement, death – well, that’s it - or is it?

Many folks rely on religion to provide the framework necessary to give life meaning. I tried that route, but it did not work out so well for me. In fact, I was still in grade school when I first discovered I needed to somehow decide life’s meaning for myself. Back then I was that kid in Sunday School who asked questions usually followed by a long pause from the teacher. I was not purposefully trying to be difficult. I hope Mrs. Abendschein appreciated my sincerity. Questions of consistency and logic posed by the requirements of faith just puzzled me. I wanted a more consistent rational framework.

So, if one plans to discover life’s meaning on their own, what is the best way to go about the investigation? Once I got to college and discovered the world of philosophical discourse, I quite naturally concluded that studying the philosophical classics was the best way to discover what I was seeking. This is probably not the best course for everyone. I quickly found most great philosophy is not written so that the average person can easily grasp the concepts.

For some reason I was inspired by the murkiness. Each philosophical system was a new mystery waiting to be solved. As I unraveled each book, I felt I was broadening my understanding. I struggled on, trying to find a way of thinking I could fully embrace. As an undergraduate I read a good deal of American thought, tried to get some grasp of Eastern religion, and first encountered the exciting existentialists. In graduate school I tackled the Greeks, brushed against the scholastics, then immersed myself in modern European thought. I stumbled through Hegel and cursed Kant for his archaic style. By the time I earned my PhD I could credibly claim a fair acquaintance with a wide range of philosophical thought. I am also now able to say with a fair degree of certainty which major philosophical system I find most helpful in understanding the meaning of life.

Rather than struggle as I did through a library of nearly incomprehensible books, today's philosophical seeker can and probably will, turn first to the internet. If you search Google for “Which philosopher am I?” you will discover dozens of short quizzes that make some claim to provide philosophical clarity. Because I was curious, I decided to take six of these tests and compare the results to the outcome I achieved after years of study.

The most commonly searched tests break down into two general types: silly and not silly.

On the silly side are three tests that pose simple questions based on personal taste and popular culture, requiring little more than a good knowledge of characters on prime time TV.  Here's my results:

Buzz Feed: Which Philosopher are you?

http://www.buzzfeed.com/tabathaleggett/which-philosopher-are-you#.kxplA7O2W

My result = Michael Foucault

Quiz Social: Which Philosopher are you?

http://quizsocial.com/which-philosopher-are-you/

My Result = Epicurus

All the tests: Philosopher Test

http://www.allthetests.com/quiz23/quiz/1181951053/Philosopher-quiz

My results = Plato 40%, Kant 33%, Nietzsche 27%

These three results could not be more divergent or more incompatible with my actual views on philosophical subjects. Other than being slightly entertaining, these three are just plain silly.

To my surprise, there also exist a number of “not silly” tests. The next three tests I took were clearly designed by people with a very good grasp of the key differences between various philosophical schools. The results also identify a range of agreement which acknowledges that most ordinary people do not possess a completely worked out coherent philosophical system.

Go To Quiz: Which Philosopher are you?

http://www.gotoquiz.com/which_philosopher_are_you

My results = Aristotle 77%, Kant 63%, Early Positivists 57%, Nietzsche 30%, Plato 26%, Existentialists 20%, Quine 12%

Select Smart: Which famous philosopher do you most agree with?

http://www.selectsmart.com/FREE/select.php?client=PhilosophyGuys

My results = Kant 100%, Aristotle 85%, Hume 66%, Plato 60%, Aquinas 35%, Sextus Empiricus 27%, Protagoras 24%, Augustine 20%, Nietzsche 0%.

Hello Quizzy: The Sublime Philosophical Crap Test

http://www.helloquizzy.com/tests/the-sublime-philosophical-crap-test

My result = N-A-O [Metaphysical Non-reductionist 67%, Epistemological Absolutist 67%, Moral Objectivist 78%] After reading the extensive analysis, my results would be a mixture of Aristotle, Dewey and Kant.

I was astounded that all three of these “not silly” tests identified Aristotle and Kant as the philosophers most compatible with my own views. It is even more astounding that I reached exactly the same conclusion after years of advanced philosophical study.

So, could I have skipped all that labored reading and just used a good Internet quiz (had the Internet existed back when I was in college)?

Well, no. Throughout my philosophical studies I felt that the key to my search would probably be found in enlightenment thought. As early as high school I was excited and convinced by the writings of Thomas Jefferson. He was clear, certain and optimistic. I knew he read widely and admired French and British thinkers of his time. This led me to read Voltaire’s Candide, but as a high school student I was not then equipped to understand it.

I later had the chance to more carefully study the main enlightenment thinkers. I greatly enjoyed reading Rousseau and Voltaire, both of whom look at the human condition as it is not as it should be. Hobbes and Locke do the same thing but none of them seem to capture the spirit I feel motivated Jefferson’s optimistic liberalism.

When I finally got around to reading from the works of David Hume (1711 - 1776) I found what I was looking for. Hume starts at the same point as other enlightenment thinkers but unlike the others he finds a way to remain optimistic and fairly humble throughout his life, even when dying at age 66 of cancer. His writing is clear and convincing. He takes a simple proposition, i.e. that everything we know or can know originates in the senses, and carefully builds his theory of knowledge and his ethics on that foundation. He rejects all ideas that do not have an empirical source in the world. His conclusions are rational and comport with common sense. He was branded a sceptic and atheist by his contemporary critics, but he had a deep influence on thinkers such as Adam Smith and Charles Darwin as well as on other philosophers, most notably Immanuel Kant. Today, Hume is recognized as a thoroughgoing exponent of philosophical naturalism, as a precursor of contemporary cognitive science, and as an inspiration for contemporary ethical theory.

Hume’s thought is quite compatible with the views of Aristotle and strongly influenced Kant. Hume's optimism stands in stark contrast to the more gloomy views of other enlightenment thinkers. So when I'm asked which philosopher best expresses my overall philosophical view, I answer “David Hume.”

The “Select Smart” Quiz knew that.