| In the Republic, Plato offers two arguments concerning the role of philosophy. The first, that philosophy leads to knowledge, has been examined frequently. However, the second, that knowledge is indispensable for a well-ordered society, is more often presupposed that examined. There are many reasons to examine this issue again, including the poor image philosophers have concerning their ability to accomplish anything practical, as well as the tendency, since Hegel, for philosophers to argue against their own interests.;In examining this issue, I study arguments concerning the social relevance of philosophy throughout the history of philosophy. Plato and Aristotle set up the debate, reaching nearly opposite conclusions. Though a few Hellenistic philosophers mention the problem, the issue is not addressed again until Descartes. Kant and Husserl also discuss the indispensability of philosophy for society. Marx, too, saw the benefits of philosophy for his revolution. Korsch and Lukacs refine Marx's views, which are then used by Horkheimer, Marcuse and Habermas to argue that only some kinds of theory are socially relevant.;The distinction between theory and practice is important to all these writers. Many argue that pure theory is an important force in changing or improving society. Yet Marx suggests that theory and practice are in fact inseparable. As such, pure theory does not exist because it is affected by practice, even as it affects practice itself. In addition, it is clear in examining these arguments that many target negative perceptions of philosophy.;While philosophers have been able to attest to the relevance of philosophy to individuals' growth and development, they have not been able to agree on if or how philosophy can affect our roles as individuals in a community. Some confusion revolves around definitions of both "social relevance" and of "philosophy." However, historical analysis does indicate that philosophy has, and therefore can, change the thoughts and actions of a society. |
