The Curse Of Philosophy

Man tends to question everything, but this is a burden to him. The questions, instead of disappearing, multiply. Because no answer is acceptable (lacks the full truth); at the end of each attempt is a justification for a new attempt. The inquiry never stops. And as he questions more, he then questions his need to question.

It bewilders him, why it is so important, that a finite being, with limited reasoning abilities and knowledge, decides to spend his little time asking questions that may take a lifetime to answer (even if he does succeed, the future may prove this answer to be wrong)?

­­­­­ Excessive curiosity about metaphysical questions can be harmful, especially when they come at the expense of more urgent concerns. You cannot avoid being disturbed by some sense of existential guilt, that perhaps, you are acting too seriously about what ought to be taken casually, and too casual about what ought to be taken seriously.

And yet the desire for philosophy is not baseless. In Less Than Nothing, Zizek writes about the value of the philosophical impulse, which has no apparent adaptive purpose.

“The point is not only that, on top of its adaptive functions (how to find one’s way in the environment, etc.), consciousness is also bothered by enigmas having no evolutionary, adaptive function (humor, art, metaphysical questions). The further (and crucial) point is that this useless supplement, this compulsive fixation on problems which a priori cannot be solved, retroactively enabled an explosion of procedures (techniques, insights) which themselves had a major survival value. It is as if, in order to assert its priority over other living beings in the struggle for survival, the human animal has to forsake the struggle for survival itself and focus on other questions. Victory in the struggle for survival can only be gained as a by-product: if one focuses directly on the struggle, one loses. Only a being obsessed with impossible or insoluble problems can make a breakthrough in possible knowledge.”

To survive, man must conceive of questions that are not directly related to survival. In the same way that to make money, man has conceive of questions not directly related to making money.

The “finite being” problem may not be the fault of philosophy, but the fault of the finite being. It is his responsibility to balance his need for philosophy with other needs, and when engaging in philosophy, to identify the right questions. He must learn to eliminate the questions that are not irrelevant, or badly formulated.

“In truth, only one kind of objection is worthwhile: the objection which shows that the question raised by a philosopher is not a good question, that it does not force the nature of things enough, that it should be raised in another way, that we should raise it in a better way, or that we should raise a different question”

Gilles Deleuze, Empiricism and Subjectivity

Originally published at




I write about ideas that matter to me. In other words, revolutionary.

Love podcasts or audiobooks? Learn on the go with our new app.

Recommended from Medium

3 Surprising Ideas From History’s Greatest Thinkers

a critique of some political Bonhoefferisms


Taking a different lesson from the Movie Graph Argument

The Curious Ambit Of Words

A bundled dichotomy of consciousness

The Philosophy of the Actor- Unearned Wisdom


Get the Medium app

A button that says 'Download on the App Store', and if clicked it will lead you to the iOS App store
A button that says 'Get it on, Google Play', and if clicked it will lead you to the Google Play store
Sud Alogu

Sud Alogu

I write about ideas that matter to me. In other words, revolutionary.

More from Medium

Learning for Learning’s Sake

The problem with everything

Random Life Reflections #1