Oh How I Want to Be a Philosopher, A Philosopher I Want to Be Part 4

But how do I become the philosopher I want to be? Could it finally be, it's synthesis time. YAY!! :) It's time to put together everything I've seen and heard and propose ideas for systems or utilize an existing system if one is already in place which can handle my ideas either as well or better than I can. Since there are a lot of systems from a lot smarter people than myself, then I will probably be borrowing someone else's system to insert my ideas. Parts 2 and 3 of this series compromised of 1 main point each which is useful to start the discussion. Part 2 focused on order and disorder. Part 3 focused on the other and what people do with the other. To start the synthesis, a brief review is necessary before one can start the application of ideas.
Order and disorder are both things which we see in being/existence. Human life exemplifies this because there are times when everything is neat and orderly, and times where everything is going wrong and one cannot get organized or have stability. Because people see both order and disorder in life, one system which can be useful to think about to advance a philosophy is Chinese Metaphysics in the I Ching. The I Ching holds many books, but the point relevant to our discussion here is the ideas of yin and yang, and the drawing of the yin and yang. In the art, one will see how in the white part of the circle there is still a black dot, while in the black part of the circle a white dot is present. This represents the idea that in light there is always darkness, and in darkness there is always light. (Peter Phan also dedicates a section of his work Jesus the Christ with an Asian Face to discuss Jung Young Lee who notes the importance of change in theology.)
This observation can be useful because it does appeal to how life seems to be. Life is a lot of change, a lot of wavering (as Heidegger would put it). In philosophy though, one does not just ascertain how things appear to be, one searches for how things really are. The question one must ask is, "whether there is perfect order in being itself, and do people search for that perfect order?" Of course, reason can never really tell us whether perfect order actually exists, this is something for the journey of faith. (For now, we'll take faith as an inclusive term which means faith in anything, the task of later work will be to define specific kinds of faith.) However, reason and experience can tell us whether people seek a perfect order. For now, let us appeal to experiences in our friendship.
Everyone has friends, and everyone has friends who talk with each other about life, stuff, whatever. We also talk to certain people about others who frustrate us, either by their actions, or simply because the person does things we do not like. (The merits of this are also reserved for another article, the important here is that it happens in friendships.) This leads to friends complaining about other people to others behind their back. An example of this is in order, your best friend decides randomly to punch you in the face one day. Before any response happens, there is a feeling, notably of disorder. You sense disorder in your friend punching you in the face because this is not what a perfectly ordered friendship is supposed to be. However, there is this desire for a perfectly ordered friendship, which has no dark spots. (This example is obviously limited because there are relationships where it is perfectly normal to hit someone in the face as a sign of affection of sorts, but everyone can think of an example similar to this where someone would not like/feel uncomfortable in a situation.)
We have to be careful, because simply by this example one cannot say there is perfect order in the universe. However, if a similar example can be carried over to every person having a desire for order (even if it is a different sense of order), then the thesis of Chinese Metaphysics above becomes harder to prove. Even people of a relativist mindset have some sense of what they think is right and wrong. None of the morals are universal in this philosophy; however, the desire itself is universal. (even if it is simply a desire to not be judgmental and let everything be relative.) People with a relativist mindset still complain about the actions which other people do to hurt them. When I was a resident assistant, on an regular basis I would hear other residents talk about how certain people should not have gotten so drunk, or talk about the girl who had too much fun at the party last weekend. All of this activity is simply a desire to have perfect order, to have the world the way I want to see it.
If there is supposed to be a perfect order and disorder is not supposed to be part of that order, then what is the correct answer to the question of order and disorder posted above? Another approach one could take is to examine human actions. What happens if the human person herself is broken; not fundamentally, but rather has the ability to do wrong. One can see many times in life where he has made mistakes and done things he wish he could replay and try again. To have regrets is a normal human reaction, it takes training to live a life of no regrets. Since human people can do wrong, then one also must believe that humans can do right. There are many times where people act in kindness toward others and people do not regret their actions. There are times when people get a warm fuzzy feeling inside because they helped someone and made their life better. (Of course, morality cannot be decided on sentiment alone, but the appeal to sentiment is to express a condition in nature, it says nothing specific about any action.)
"The other" is also an important point to examine notably in how we treat other people who are different from ourselves. In being, people see a "me" and a "not-me". There are certain things I do, and certain things others do. People are all different, so any philosophy must be able to deal with difference. Let us take an example from Christianity which will serve as the example of differentiation. Most people have heard the story of the crucifixion of Christ and the events which played out to get Christ there. In his work, Christ served the poor, down-trodden, and Gentile people and spoke a message which was different from the religious leaders of the time. (Jesus was a Jew and Jews insisted on separation from Gentiles (Orthodox Jews still keep separate dishes for Gentiles and themselves)). Because Christ acted as the "not-me" for the religious leaders of the time, the Jewish leaders sought to get rid of Christ. The Jewish leaders then worked with Roman authorities to give Christ the death penalty. (Keep in mind under ancient law only Romans could actually give the death penalty to someone). This is a lesson in differentiation and the consequences of it. Whatever your creedal beliefs, one can see how Christ was a nice guy, who was a little different. Because of a lack of respect for differentiation, Christ suffered the death penalty. (Again only speaking on a physical level, the beliefs add extended meaning to this which can be discussed in different circles.)
This act also shows the consequences of order and disorder. Because humans can do wrong, then humans can also act against those who are different from them. (We see many examples of this in human history, most of the wars in the modern era started because of people assaulting differentiation (World War II, the situation in Rwanda and D.R. Congo are just a few examples.) Many people decry these conflicts because they are assaults against humanity which grew simply because of people being different. People of all creeds want a solution which allows for peace. From what has been shown above, Christianity is a strong example which can instill peace, and explain what we see in being.
We've already discussed how Christianity teaches about the other through the example of Christ (through his willingness to serve the poor, the downtrodden, and Gentiles.) "The other" is someone who must be treated with love and respect. Christianity also teaches about order and disorder, the death of Christ shows humans who make a choice to kill Jesus. (Jesus in creedal Christianity is seen as pure order). Because humans make a choice to kill, this is seen as disorder, and it shows how humans can do disordered things. Humans have this ability to be disordered because humans choose disorder. Humans want pure order because this is the essence of happiness and peace, but in life people make choices which allow disorder into their lives. (There is also natural disorder which gets into the Christian theory of suffering, while important, is outside the scope of this already long piece.)
Christianity is a good philosophical system because it can explain the main features observed in being, and it connects these points into a conclusive synthesis which calls for respect of all creation. This is something which is desirable because it can pave a way of peace. Christianity can also help people engage the order and disorder within themselves. By starting this discussion, people can grow in themselves and reach new heights. The particulars of which are not important now, but one can see how the potential is there, which is all a system can do. The rest is based on the people who follow that system and engage its tradition.

Aristocrates

P.S. Some presuppositional talk is probably in order here. As mentioned in my introductory post I am an MA theology student and also a Roman Catholic. These presuppositions do read into my philosophy because I have concentrated a lot of reading into the Catholic tradition. (while also reading some amount of modern philosophy and phenomenology as well.) Any post-modern view of this article will see these presuppositions, which is fine, I am open to admitting I have presuppositions. What is important to realize is all people have these presuppositions and they all have some effect on decision making. The decision making process I use in this article is based on reason and thoughts but it is important to know and list my presuppositions at some point in this piece, as I've given my synthesis here. I hope you enjoyed the read.