Sophiaphobia: Experience of Apologia of Philosophy at University

Article

Abstract

[In Russian]

On the basis of the statement that the university is possible only when there is versatile knowledge there, the article refutes the basic arguments against teaching philosophy at university. It is stated that philosophy is a necessary independent form of versa- tile knowledge, whose major problem is the relation of a person to the world, including gnoseological and in general world outlook, which is important for university education taking into account its aims. Philosophy really does not reach certain parameters of accuracy and validity, which however does not serve as a suffi- cient basis for its denial. Basic negation of versatile knowledge is a position that contradicts itself and subverts human thinking as a whole. The perception of philosophy as useless or dangerous is as inconsistent and does not prove the refusal of it, as the represen- tation of it as something innate, simple and unable to be taught.

As far as there are no rational arguments in favour of denial of philosophy, the article concludes that the reason for this is basically irrational. Sophiaphobia in relation to philosophy can be often the result of some particular problems (defect of com- munication with a lecturer, the unsuccessful organisation and so on) but in this case it is necessary to solve these certain problems instead of denying philosophy in general. While the aversion of philosophy has a general character it can be viewed as a conse- quence of universal sophiaphobia of the present, or as a result of features of sociocultural positioning of philosophy in the present, including the process of teaching. In the latter case the possible reasons are replacement of originality of thinking by a reproduc- tion of thinking of authorities, unsystematic and unnatural char- acter of philosophy courses, and also a common cultural image of a philosopher as an unhappy lonely theorist. If these difficulties are not solved sophiaphobia of philosophy will win whatever ra- tional arguments against it are found.