As I am plucking my hair - the few strands I still have - reading the books of philosophers (Hegel, Husserl and the like), I am beginning to wonder if philosophy is to be treated as a subject at all. Well certainly to distinguish it from other branches of study, you call it by its name. But as a separate entity? Not so sure of that.
However, of this I'm sure: philosophy, for what it is intended, for priests-in-training, is to be a method of thought rather than a subject. As of now, it is visualised, both by students and professors, as a subject to be taught rather than an art to be nurtured. Many question the very need of philosophy in the formation curriculum of priests and religious. Rightly so! What the post-novitiate phase of formation ends up doing is study of the history of philosophy rather than the method of philosophizing. The history part could very much be a part of the study, but cannot really lead to a critical reflection, unless the ultimate goal is such.
However, of this I'm sure: philosophy, for what it is intended, for priests-in-training, is to be a method of thought rather than a subject. As of now, it is visualised, both by students and professors, as a subject to be taught rather than an art to be nurtured. Many question the very need of philosophy in the formation curriculum of priests and religious. Rightly so! What the post-novitiate phase of formation ends up doing is study of the history of philosophy rather than the method of philosophizing. The history part could very much be a part of the study, but cannot really lead to a critical reflection, unless the ultimate goal is such.
No comments:
Post a Comment