The purpose of philosophy is to do exactly what you're doing right now: To ask “why?”. After all of our basic needs are taken care of, such as food, shelter, and procreation, we then start asking the question "why?".

Until our basic needs are taken care of, we don’t have time to sit around and contemplate, “Why are we doing all this?” We just survived, if we were lucky or skillful enough. But all animals survive. What differentiates us from the animals is that we ask “Why?”

The ancient philosophers looked up at the sky and wondered, “What is this all about? Why are we here? Did anybody, such as God, put us here? Who are we? How can we be at peace within ourselves, now that all our needs are met?

The Stoic philosophers, the Buddha, Lao Tsu, and so many others realized that we have the capacity to reason, figure things out, and find a way to live at peace with ourselves, nature, and each other. This is why philosophy came about. As humans we have the unique capacity to contemplate our own deaths and frame our lives accordingly.
​
Of course, nothing can really be known with our limited brains, and we can debate about objectivity and subjectivity forever. But that is not the point. We are philosophizing animals if we live beyond the survival stage. And we will continually wonder why.

Western Philosophy, with some exceptions, is a temple to the rational mind. Reasoning and figuring out why things are the way they are, are the main focus. For example, the Philosopher Kant, formulated reasons for why we need to behave altruistically towards others. Even Descartes, with his, “I think, therefore I am,” emphasizes the rational mind. He does not say: “I feel therefore I am,” or “I witness, therefore I am.”
​
Eastern philosophy is more concerned with going within to find who we are as an Eternal reflection of cosmic consciousness. To do this, we must bypass the rational mind and forget about the “why’s” of things. They are the way they are and no matter how bright we are, we will never get to the bottom of it all—but Who and What is it that wants to understand?

To find out who we are, behind the labels, masks, and conditioning, we must not be distracted by the constant stream of thoughts that swirl through the mind. It takes discipline to rise above this whirlpool. It takes training to recognize the tricks of the mind. This is what Eastern philosophy aims to do. And it offers pointers to how to move away from the collector’s search for never-ending knowledge.

In general, Western philosophy is about knowing. Eastern philosophy is about finding our unity with an underlying structure of reality that never dies and never changes. It presumes we can never fully know, but we can still unite in peace with All That Is, because, at base, this is who we really are anyway. All knowledge passes away, but the Soul, in its union with the Universe, is eternal.

We can collect as much knowledge as we want, but it does not bring peace or comfort. But once we go within, with a truly quiet mind, all the harmony of the Universe is revealed.

Carl Jung is saying the that the lower mind (as opposed to Divine Consciousness) moves mechanically, restlessly on the move, non-stop, like a pendulum. He thinks it is not so much concerned with what is right and wrong while it swings back and forth between fantasy and reality.
​
Right and wrong have to do with what we are taught, whereas, the mind, left on its own is like a wild stallion. It is not easy to tame and disregards what we are taught to be good and bad. It runs back and forth from pleasure to pain, love and hate, anger and peace, regardless of how right or wrong these feelings may be deemed to be by its society.

Yet, Carl Jung may have not seen how deeply the lower mind clings to the pendulum that swings between right and wrong. He may not have acknowledged that we are constantly judging, measuring ourselves against others, measuring others against ourselves, and coming up with conclusions that add to even more judgments about who is right and who is wrong. So I would amend that statement to read, “The pendulum of the mind oscillates between sense and nonsense, right and wrong.” We move from fantasy to reality while we are constantly judging according to some yardstick, whether real or imagined.

For example, you are at a party and someone spills a syrupy drink all over you. You immediately swing from anger to forgiveness as the drink spiller desperately apologizes. Then you congratulate yourself inwardly for being the better person and not throwing your drink in his or her face. You feel pleased that you are being moral about it and doing the right thing. From there you can go into fantasy of overcoming the mishap and becoming the best of friends, even possible soul mates.

All the time you are presenting yourself to yourself in the best light in terms of right and wrong while you are living out a fantasy in your mind that may be completely preposterous (they’re married, you’re married, it truly was an accident and nothing more, in life drinks get spilled). Or the pendulum can swing the other way, combining nonsense with morality. You imagine yourself fighting this person because they were wrong to be so careless and end up berating yourself as a victim that always attracts bad things. You go to the corner to cry.

While I admire Carl Jung, I feel he did not recognize that the ego mind is not as straightforward as a pendulum. It is more like a free-flying, restless machine that is all over the place. A pendulum follows certain gravitational pulls, while the ego mind is capable of going off in a completely random way.

Philosophy is not a science in the sense that it can be proven under laboratory conditions. It is not a science at all. It is an art. Yes, it involves rules of logic. But logic can easily be led astray and become absurd. For example:

All cats have fur.
My dog has fur.
Therefore, my dog is a cat.

We can even argue that not all cats have fur, as in hairless cats. So philosophy can become a hair-splitting exercise in which we get bogged down in defining terms and allowing for exceptions to the rule. This kind of philosophy is bloodless and drab compared to philosophy that asks the deepest questions of life. It might mimic the scientific approach because of a system of rule, but it can lead to crazy conclusions.
​
Determining how we know what we know can never be an exact science. We can follow the rules of deductive and inductive reasoning but in the end, they are dry and lifeless. The deeper questions about who we are, why we are here, who is God, and what happens after we die cannot ever be examined in a laboratory. Therefore, philosophy is more of an art, depending on revelation and inspiration. It is not a science with measurable results and repeatable experiments.

​

Yes. Philosophy, when taken down to its Greek roots, means “love of wisdom.” Love and appreciation are closely tied to each other. But philosophy is more than just love of wise thoughts and wisdom. It is the analysis of answers to the basic questions of life:

• Who are we?
• Why are we here?
• What is the purpose of life?
• What is good and evil?
• Why is there something rather than nothing?
• Is our universe real?
• Do we have free will?
• Does God exist?
• Is there life after death?
• Can you really experience anything objectively?
• What is the best moral system?

These are just a few of the questions philosophers have been asking since people first began to think and record their musings. They are also questions that cannot be answered easily. Religions of the world have claimed they have the right answers. But philosophers always hold an open mind that their answers are only possibilities. They will continue. loving to ask these questions because the answers provide the wisdom by which we can live happy and fulfilled lives.

Confucius said, “Before you embark on a journey of revenge, dig two graves.” This is because holding onto anger, past hurts, and upsets harms you. You are not free to live a life of joy and peace because you are constantly rolling around in the mud of what happened yesterday. The other person may be just fine with what they did, you are the one who is suffering. To add more suffering to an already suffering world is not a solution on the path of wisdom and understanding.

It is better to leave it to Karma and to the balance of the Universe if someone has wronged you. If you keep holding onto it, you are continuing the sorrow, the hurt, and the problem takes over your life. It is much kinder to yourself to let it go. It is not up to you to be the judge, the jury and the executioner. Other forces of the universe are at work to put things to right. Let them do their job and just live in peace.
​
There will always be people who are cruel and hurtful based on their insecurities and evil intent. You don’t need to add to the world’s burden of distress. The evil can stop with you. And in that way you will build yourself up to be strong and able to handle life’s misfortunes without thinking you have to set. everything right. It is not up to you. Just be free and know that no one gets away with anything in a perfect Universe.

Socrates wasn’t a hedonist, but his student Aristippus of Cyrene, was what is known as an “ethical hedonist.” He stated that pleasure is the highest good.

Aristippus explained that hedonistic ethical egoism is the concept that everyone has the right to do everything they can to attain the greatest amount of pleasure possible to them. He also said that everyone's pleasure should far surpass their amount of pain. He came to these conclusions after sitting at Socrates’ feet and hearing his musings and stimulating questions.

Socrates never made an explicit stand against hedonism itself. He stated that knowledge is virtue (which is what brings happiness and fulfillment). He was more interested in concepts such as, “Know Thyself” and “The unexamined life is not worth living.” This could be seen as the very opposite of unthinking hedonism, in which people satisfy their every whim and desire without anything else in mind besides having fun.
​
Frolicking around in an endless party doesn’t always end well, though. Ultimately, the fun will go away, and then what will we be left with if we don’t know who we truly are in the depths of our heart, inner-mind, and Soul? Gorging on food and drink, sex and riotous living is actually the opposite of what Socrates was pointing to if we want inner peace and contentment.

In a sense, we can determine that Socrates thought hedonism was self-defeating. If we are totally self-interested and seek nothing but pleasure, we are bound to fail because the appetite for pleasure is insatiable. It’s called the “paradox of hedonism.” So, although Socrates doesn’t think hedonism is bad, he just saw it as self-defeating and would never bring true happiness.

The “easy” problem of consciousness answers questions like the following:

• How do we learn, store memories, or perceive things?
  
  
• How do we know to pull our hand away from a hot stove?
  
  
• Why do we hear our name spoken even in a noisy gathering?
  
  

The “hard” problem of consciousness asks these questions:

• Why do all those complicated brain processes feel like anything from the inside?
  
  
• What is the point of this kind of awareness?
  
  
• Why aren’t we just useful robots, capable of retaining and acting on information, of responding to noises, smells and other environmental stimuli—but totally blank and dark inside, lacking an inner life?
  
  
• How could the gelatinous, tissue inside your skull (the brain) give rise to something as mysterious as all or our experiences and feelings?
  
  

Questions like these, which blur the boundaries between science and philosophy, make some experts angry and confused because they cannot begin to answer them. Some argue that conscious sensations, such as pain, don’t really exist, no matter what we feel as we slam our finger in the door. Others argue that that plants and trees are conscious.

The Hard Problem has prompted arguments in scientific journals about what is going on in the mind of a zombie, or ask the question “What is it like to be a bat?” Some argue that the problem marks the boundary not just of what we currently know, but of what science could ever explain. On the other hand, in recent years, a handful of neuroscientists have come to believe that it may finally be solved – but only if we are willing to accept the conclusion that computers or the internet might soon become conscious, too.
​
We know for certain that we have inner experience of sights, smells, touch, emotions and the rest. Some scientists say we should concede that consciousness is just the physical brain, doing what brains do. Others say that consciousness is the only thing that matters and the rest is illusion. And since no one really knows for sure, the debate goes on.

The only absolute certainty is that the Universe exists, everything else is probability. Even the atom, when examined under scanning electron microscopes, consists of particles and waves that have a probability of being in a certain place at a certain time, according to physicist Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle.

Heisenberg states that the position and the velocity of an object cannot both be measured exactly, at the same time, even in theory. To bypass the details of his theory, but to get to the meat—-He is saying that even the most fundamental “building blocks” of material reality, are based on the probability of being there rather than certainty because we can’t measure them together. Position, energy and time, are unknown, except by probabilities because they cannot be measured simultaneously.

People who do not understand this think that everything they see is real and that everything they were taught by their religion is true. This makes people feel very secure and in control. It is unsettling to know that there is never absolute certainty from the human mind’s point of view.

But when we step into the world of the Spirit, it’s OK to be uncertain about it all. We can relax into the uncertainty. We know we are not in control and that the only thing we really can control is our thoughts and body movements (most of which are beyond our voluntary control anyway). It is probable that our heart will beat one more beat but one day that will be impossible too.
​
When we see things from deep within our Souls we feel awe at the uncertainty and yet perfection of it all. The Universe is perfectly put together, with uncertainty built into its most fundamental nature. And yet it flows in an orderly fashion that will always be beyond human comprehension.

New Age philosophy does not promote narcissism but narcissists can use New Age philosophy to promote their own agendas. Then again, narcissists can use any philosophy to get what they want out of others. And what narcissists want is adulation, praise, and validation from strangers to create a sense of self that continues to elude them.

We really can’t blame New Age philosophy for what people have interpreted it to be. In essence, New Age philosophy is innocent. It looks forward to a “New Age” of love and light through personal transformation and healing. There is nothing narcissistic about that.

Here is where the problem comes in: The New Age Movement encourages self love. As RuPaul says, “If you can’t love yourself, how are you gonna love anyone else?” There is so much truth in this. Taken the way it’s intended, it means we have to care enough about developing our own inner light before we are even capable of seeing it in another.

Loving yourself can be misinterpreted to mean a puffed up, conceited over-evaluation of your gifts and abilities. Or it can mean grab everything for yourself in a never-ending quest for more, more, and more. But this has never been stated as an aim of the New Age movement. Loving yourself is deep, respectful humility in your recognition of the magnificent Universe of which you partake. It has nothing to do with petty egos bolstering themselves with magical thinking.
​
If people have cheapened the New Age movement by using it for their own ego gratification, it is nothing new. All the spiritual movements of this planet have been corrupted through egotistical human interpretation. The golden embroidery on velvet priestly vestments is very different from the unadorned robe and sandals Jesus wore in the desert. Charismatic, egotistical, and narcissistic individuals will use any belief system for their personal advancement. The New Age Movement is no exception.