Thank you, Cez Yza, for a crucial question.
The answer depends mostly on what we believe makes up a philosopher.
If we follow Karl Popper, we are all already philosophers because we all hold philosophical prejudices, that is, we have views on life, the universe, and everything. Being a philosopher in this sense is neither difficult nor necessarily beneficial, because simply having a worldview does not guarantee that it is a particularly good one. Philosophy as a conscious activity then mostly consists in uncovering, analysing, and criticising these implicit conceptions.
This is also largely what Popper’s old nemesis, Plato, has Socrates do in many of his dialogues. Philosophy in this vein is the activity of searching out our preconceptions, to question our presuppositions, and to engage in careful and logical discussions about them. The goal is basically to become slightly less blinkered or foolish, if not quite wise.
Obviously, most people are not philosophers in this sense: although it is something anyone could do, at least anyone who is able to think about what they are usually thinking, and to articulate these thoughts. Famously, even fairly young children touch upon the classic questions “what does that word really mean?” or “why should we believe that?” And if we continually answer them honestly and in a way they can understand, they might develop the habit of asking such questions, thus becoming philosophically inclined human beings.
If we take philosophy to be an academic discipline, however, governed by certain standards, lorded over by a small group of powerful people (mostly men) who decide what counts as philosophy in the first place, then anyone who has the inclination and the means to play along in the game can become a philosopher. If you have the right pedigree, make time to learn the lingo, accept the mainstream premises, adopt a certain style, and write about the right topics, you might get published in some of the correct journals. After a few years slaving away you might fulfil all the external criteria to be dubbed a “professional philosopher”.
Whether this has much to do with philosophy in the first sense is debatable. Some professional philosophers are clearly still in the business of critically questioning our presuppositions (whether those belong to common-sense, to quantum physics or to philosophy itself does not change the nature of the questioning), whilst others are nothing more than technically skilled and successful dogmatists who never question their own worldview.
Now that we have considered whether anyone can become a philosopher, I would like to end on a related question: should everyone become a philosopher? I don’t think we need more professional philosophers, to be honest. But I do think we desperately need more inquisitive and reflexive minds out there, no matter their profession. Why? Well, let us sit under this plane tree and talk it out…
What do you think? Is philosophy open to all? Let us know in the comments.
If you have a question for the Armchair Philosophers, don’t hesitate to get in touch. You can find us on Twitter (@armchair_o) or fill in this form.
Be sure to check out our podcast!
If you like what we do, you can support us by buying us a coffee!
Image: Plato’s Plane Tree (credit)
I received my PhD in philosophy in 2017; my dissertation was called “Plato's Bastard” (published as “Phenomenology as Platonism” [Phänomenologie als Platonismus]). My areas of interest are phenomenology, metaphysics and their overlap; but I dabble in whatever field I feel like – and with whoever's up for it. Philosophy to me means questioning our presuppositions, which fascinates me because it is something we can do whenever anyone says anything about anything and it never gets boring or old; it's also something that's painfully absent from public discourse, but easily learned. Enter: public philosophy!
Philosophy IS open to all! Some people just don’t care to take the time and question why things are or seem to be the way they are. I love a good debate, I love to hear other’s point of view and their reasons behind it. I’m naturally inquisitive. If I had the free time or the opportunity to earn money to pick apart my and other’s thoughts, I would be published by now.