>>10048624By your definition anyone could become a philosopher. Those who seek wisdom in all facets of life and learn from the lessons life gives them are philosophers. Those who would seek that which cannot be sought would be philosophers. To assume the title would mean to adhere to a constant of behavior. Eternally forced to ponder and postulate that which cannot be solved. Philosophers are also expected to write diligently to solidify their reasoning adhering to a predetermined methodology of proofing. I cannot articulate well enough nor postulate clearly enough to share my wisdom with others. I can only observe, postulate and respond when warranted. None of what I do is philosophy. Merely idle thought in a still mind. I am only as wise as you make me out to be. Barba tenus sapientes. To put it simply.
>>10048641>I have no real experience with the things I have read about.Allow me to make a modest argument. Anything that we perceive as "real" are merely what we have seen before and can assert in our mind as "real" such as a tree or an apple. The concept that makes it real is that you can see it in your head because you know it. Therefore you can declare it as real and would assert that all real items you can mentally visualize as you have seen it before. To this I argue that ideas and matters of the mind are just as real as any material item. We can imagine the idea, we can share it with others, they can then see it in their mind and therefore it meets all the criteria for being "real". Now of course this argument is flawed fundamentally as more goes into determining "reality" than simple mental visualization however it shouldn't be discounted as unreal. Something in your mind can influence you just as much as something in the real world. While you say you haven't had any real experience I would say you have your own experiences, lessons and strengths that have formed what your "real" experience would be.
>You sound older than I amOnly if you're over 30.
