2019/3, стр. 251 - 263

PHILOSOPHY, RATIONALITY AND DECISION- MAKING: BASIC TECHNIQUES AND TOOLS OF BUILDING THE HUMAN MIND

Резюме:

Ключови думи:

Abstract. This paper studies the viability of philosophy as a system of knowledge and its ecacy as a tool for decision making. Decisions are the key to life, given the existential predicaments human beings constantly confront and the fact that man is a purposive being. A being with a defined purpose is inevitably a being possessing rationality. Rationality is about the meaning and communication of our thoughts and actions. It is about the way that we manage our behavior and experience as humans. Our experiences commit us to courses of action- decisions, as seen in both the public and private domains. We are often confronted with choices or options about pathways or world views to follow or adopt. Such choices compel us to make decisions or take actions that have profound consequences on our lives and eventually on the lives of others. In some cases, decision making can be a mind boggling or tricky thing. Therefore, we may ask: Is there a way that philosophical thinking or knowledge can add value to the decisions made by people or even the capacity of people to make some decisions (moral, logical, epistemological, esthetic or political)? If the answer is yes, then what logical and empirical features of philosophy can facilitate constructive and valuable decision making in daily life or at higher levels of abstract thought. Through the use of examples and analysis, the paper shows that philosophy as knowledge system is particularly illuminating with regard to the ways our human minds form ideas or principles, and the role of ideas and concepts in building tools for coordinating the physical and mental aspects of reality. Reality is partly based on facts and phenomena, as well as value judgments, opinions, beliefs, tastes and preferences. How does philosophical knowledge help us to manage these dynamic and different elements in reality? This work emphasizes the qualitative or social elements that philosophy brings to bear on the material and mental aspects of human existence.

Keywords: philosophy; decisions; thinking; logic; conceptual analysis; human mind

Introduction and problem

Philosophers ask certain questions and attempt to answer them in a certain way, because it is generally agreed that philosophical thinking aims at breaking down a lot of bad reasoning, stereotypes and prejudices that arise from our daily living in this world. Some of these stereotypes are not delivered to us deliberately or with the desire to mislead us, rather we may have been born with them. Philosophy encourages openness and tolerance as well as the need for us to allow alternative ways of viewing the world. These are ideas and ideals that are not easily attained or conceptualized among humans and even among philosophers. It seems that in the quest to alter or change the behavior and experience of man, the demands of philosophical training seem partly discordant from the natural tendencies of human nature. Human nature in most cases seeks to be primitively egoistic, harmful to others, intolerant, anachronistic, oppressive, disobedient to the rule of law, emotional and disdainful of the rules of logic, objectivity and sound reasoning. This is the truth about human beings.

Despite the above, philosophy or philosophical thinking offers itself as a way of determining and guiding decision making. In this way there is an opportunity for some parts of philosophical understanding to be relevant to human life. We may ask: What is philosophy? How can human beings use philosophy to help decision making? Decision making is both deontological (rule guided) and teleological (result oriented), and hence, a serious business because our thoughts and choices have short term and long term consequences, some of which are intended or unintended. Decision-making is a very fundamental trait that any human being ought to develop. When we observe human actions, social events and their consequences, it dawns on us that at the heart of good decision-making lies at the heart of leadership and positive social actions. Given the seriousness of the above, the thinking that leads to our decisions needs to be focused, systematic, articulate and organized.

To make humans to stand a chance of reforming or transforming human nature some sort of philosophical or conceptual learning and political action towards enlightenment needs to be involved. Let us recall Francis Bacon’s theory of “idols.” According to Bacon (1972: 92) human nature is captured by the idols. “The idols of the Tribe have their foundation in human nature itself, and in the tribe or race of men. The idols of the Cave are the idols of the individual man. For everyone (besides the errors common to human nature in general) has a cave or den of his own, which refracts or discolors the light of nature; owing to his own proper and peculiar nature.” The nature of the human being creates a two stage problem that reveals the weak point of man universally and then shows the weak point of each particular man. Such limitations are tied around the categories or parameters of race, intelligence, ethnicity, religion, sex, gender, beliefs, values, institutions, culture, traditions and class or caste among others.

Human beings are constantly engaged in making decisions. A decision is a choice, a taste, a preference, an option selected. Decisions direct and affect human actions. Put simply, even thinking is in turn, a cause, and a derivative of decision making. Humans act or behave in ways that show that choices, decisions and preferences are the basis of their existence as decision makers. Even a refusal or inability to take a decision is itself a decision. In most cases human beings make or take such decisions based all sort of motivations. Decisions can be good or bad, right or wrong, just or unjust, progressive or retrogressive, resulting in attendant consequences. Some decisions are made based on just the way some persons feel at that point in time (whims and caprices), perception, stereotypes, racial and caste prejudices, religious sentiments, ethnic inclinations, health status, beliefs or opinions, educational background, ideological tendencies, egoism, authoritarianism, communalism, anachronism, among other social or moral principles as well as other psychological motivations among others. Such predispositions affect our decisions.

Going beyond our commonsense beliefs and unconfirmed assumptions requires some extra mental and physical efforts by human beings, who are of incapable or unwilling. As such philosophy raises the bar and challenges existing views by raising questions. Question asking is a mental activity or a thought process which is cardinal to serious philosophical work. The process of thinking is one of the key features of the intellectual senses (will, thought, conscience, abstraction, feelings, reflection, reasoning) as opposed to the physical senses (seeing, hearing, tasting, smelling, touching). It means that philosophy has a lot to do with the human mind or intellect, especially the ideas produced thereof. According to a British scholar H. S. Staniland (2000) ‘philosophy is the critical examination of the ideas that we live by.’ Let us have a conceptual analysis of Staniland’s idea. Granted that H. S. Staniland has defined philosophy as a critical examination of the ideas that we live by, yet this definition itself can be critically examined. We may argue that philosophers do not only criticize ideas, they also criticize institutions, beliefs, values and other elements of human life. In other words, philosophy entails not only the criticism of human ideas but also of human cultures and world views.

The nature of philosophy

Philosophy is important to human existence due to its umbilical connection to a unique form of human thinking known as reflection. Human beings are unique as products or creatures of nature, partly because of their capacity to think which in turn enables the production of physical and conceptual tools. Baumgarten (1980: 182) holds that philosophy as a professional field “requires expert knowledge, a period of training, social importance and the maintenance of standards by those already established.” More specifically, such tools determine and promote human productivity, yet the key factor here depends on the ability to make some kinds of choices. There seems to be a sense in which we as humans cannot do without philosophy if our lives are to be meaningful and productive. Accordingly, philosophy becomes an issue of individual or national survival.

Philosophy means a lot of things to different people, thus posing a problem when we wish to have an accurate and acceptable definition of the idea. Van Der Bogert (1983: 77) holds that philosophy is “something heterogeneous in character, of which no simple description is possible.” This tendency presents itself as a serious challenge. Ayer (1969: 2) rightly argues that philosophy is not one single thing, because the conception of the subject has changed in the course of its history, and currently it covers disparate activities. Indeed, the problem is not so much that there is a difference of opinion about the range of problems which are to be regarded as philosophical. Rather, there is disagreement and uncertainty about the character of these problems, the methods by which they are to be tackled, and the status and even the possibility of the solutions to them. Thus, to answer the question ‘what is philosophy?’ there is a need to look at the questions that philosophers ask, and the answers that they give (Parkinson, 1988: 13 – 14).

Philosophy has been conceived in different ways by scholars. In one predominant sense, philosophy understood as the criticism of the ideas that humans live by, raises critical and questions about the fundamental ideas or principles underlying human though, conduct and experience (Bodunrin, 1981: 19, Gyekye, 1997: 5, Staniland, 2000: 3, Okolo, 1993: 158 – 159, Sogolo, 1993: 11). Construed in this manner, it is essentially a reflective investigation into human personal and social experience (Omoregbe, 1998: 3). It attempts to understand and explain the ultimate questions of reality (Bronstein et al, 1964, Oruka, 1990: 4, Sinha, 1973: 111, Mclnerney, 1992: 1 – 2, Gyekye, 1997: 10 – 11, Broad, 1964: 616, Maritain, 1964: 626 – 635). It is a rational inquiry into the meaning of experience (Moore, 1935: 64). Philosophy “as a thinking activity is the primary meaning of philosophy. Philosophers have not always agreed on the precise ways in which philosophical thinking activity should be carried out” (Cohen, 1996: 1) Philosophy “questions our basic assumptions” (Mclnerney, 1992: 1). It “is an unyielding quest to go beyond what we know and take for granted” (Greetham, 2006: 2).

Philosophical ideas are often expressed as philosophical problems, which seem different from other kinds of problems that we find in science for instance. Philosophical problems are tackled using arguments and analysis. Philosophical problems as mentioned earlier are usually perennial, argumentative, intractable, universal, fundamental, and address issues dealing with the very basis of human life. It is possible for two different or opposing arguments to be equally persuasive even though they reflect different understanding or opposite sides of a philosophical problem or question. For example, there are philosophical questions such as: What is human nature? What is the meaning of life? Does God exist? How is appearance different from reality? The most important thing about philosophical questions is that they remain relevant even if such were posed in the era of Socrates or Plato. Advancements in empirical information available in the world do not easily or substantially add or remove from the merit or viability of the philosophical problem or the way that the problem is posed. The answers we provide to such problems or questions determine how we live or act in the world. As such, we need an intellectual foundation for the things we do and say in the world.

Philosophy seems to be an unending process of question without definitive answers. Roth and Sontag (1987: 502) argue that “philosophers are more interested in the questions themselves than in providing final answers. They feel that philosophy’s first role is to clarify the questions.” Every answer serves as a basis for further questions. Philosophy is a cognitive enterprise. This is so because it yields some knowledge of sort some sort. When a problem earlier presumed to be philosophical has been solved by another discipline then it ceases to be a philosophical problem and is assigned or delegated to the field where the solution came from. This tendency is not necessarily a disadvantage.

The origin and relevance of philosophy

The way that philosophy comes into existence also illustrates the modus operandi of it; the way philosophy facilitates decision making and building of knowledge. How did philosophy come into being? Plato and Aristotle tell us that “this ‘wonder’ is the beginning of philosophy” (Omoregbe, 1998: 3). Bodunrin (1981: 13) holds that “philosophy begins in wonder, the sources of which cannot be exhaustively catalogued for they are as many as the whole gamut of human experience.” Man wonders about many things in this world especially events, processes and relations. The sources of philosophical attention include:

Things and events that we see around us such as: the stars, the oceans, people even plants and animals. What do they mean? How should we relate with them?

We wonder about processes that we notice around us – that is we wonder about how and why things happen. For example, the process of life and death and the process of growth and decay.

3. We wonder about issues concerning social interaction and human cooperation- how should we as human beings live our lives in the society? How should I interact with my fellow human beings? How should I interact with nature?

Philosophy answers these questions by proceeding from wonder to curiosity, from curiosity to reflection, from reflection to knowledge. The knowledge that the philosopher gets from this process is a product of logical reasoning. Philosophical knowledge which is a product of reflection is an addition by man to what is already naturally in existence or reality. This addition is an ‘extra’ knowledge which was produced through human mental effort and intellectual intervention. The extra that comes from philosophical knowledge has to be worked for so that people can value it. This is the reason why some philosophers have said that you can measure the level of the civilization of a people by looking at the level of their philosophical thinking. The philosophical thinking of a people is easily seen in the kinds of philosophical knowledge that they produce, especially in the main branches of the field.

Knowledge produced by the main branches of philosophy (epistemology, ethics, logic, metaphysics and political philosophy) are products of these three questions above. Metaphysics studies ultimate reality, moving beyond appearances to the basis of things. It studies being or what is or what exists- ontology and the processes of things becoming or coming into being. Epistemology studies the theory of knowledge. It focuses on the way we know, how we know, what we know, the scope of things we know, the types of things we know. Ethics is the study of human conduct, behavior and thought. It is the normative study of the principles that guide our rules and actions in terms of right and wrong, good and bad, justice and injustice. Political philosophy analyzes and prescribes the preferred or correct political society that human should practice. It studies political concepts and develops political theories for guiding and explaining human experiences.

Let us study in some detail, the third question of: How humans should live together for a common purpose, so as to show the value of that question. Human beings cannot live without philosophy. One other way that philosophy can show its relevance to decision making is to examine and prescribe improved ways of managing our social and cultural realms of human life. All through the history of man and political philosophy, people have always sought what they consider as the most suitable political ideas and systems of social life that can improve the condition of men. How should man live his life in the state? Why should man obey or recognize the state? In response to the above questions philosophy evaluates different forms of political life. It proposes certain types of political action and human conduct for security and justice. For example, we have Plato’s philosophical theory of the Ideal State which divides society into three parts the guardians, auxiliaries and artisans such that we attain justice in society when all the parts work together in harmony. Also philosophy examines the issue of the developmental stages of human or social life, in form of starting from the way things were, to the way things are and then to how they ought to be. For example, we have Marx’s theory of historical materialism which explains the different possible developmental stages of human society from the slave society to feudal society to capitalist society to socialist society and finally to communist society.

Main impact of philosophy on human life: (re-) forming the human mind We ought not to overestimate this presumed capability of philosophical thought to impact on the human intellect. It is enough to draw attention to the fact that philosophy has a unique set of tools, instruments, subjects and relevance. Philosophical knowledge is different from many other kinds of knowledge. Philosophy is not applied or life science so some of the benefits of philosophy may not be immediately physical or practical. For instance, you may not be able to immediately see the benefits of philosophy the way you can see; the road that an engineer has built, a sick person cured by a medical doctor’s effort, a cloth sewn into a beautiful dress by a tailor or a loaf of bread that a baker has made. A lot of the benefits of philosophy are concentrated on the development of people’s minds and thoughts. The power of philosophy is targeted at changing the human mind – the way people think so that they can have clearer ideas and hence create improved ways of achieving more productive action. If we are able to restructure the way humans think about issues, then we can affect the specific outcomes of their actions.

We must emphasize that “philosophy is deeply rooted in human life” (Stace, 1937: 316). The human being views himself as a central element of life generally using the human mind to generate thought and the body to perform actions. Viscount Samuel (1956: 199) holds that “men’s actions are governed by their ideas: right ideas lead to good actions and good actions bring welfare: wrong ideas lead to bad actions and bad actions bring suffering and disaster.” The point we are making is that whereas the effects or benefits of a discipline such as medicine can be physically seen in observed acts such as the curing of illness or disease, yet philosophy is equally beneficial to man even though the effects of philosophy are not tangible in that sense. The qualitative yet consequential effects of philosophy can be seen in the following impacts on human beings:

l. The improvement in the quality of the thinking, imagination and knowledge of the people. Philosophical thinking facilitates the improvement in the capacity to understand deep questions that affect the lives of people.

2. The opportunity to be critical, to broaden our minds so that we can rationally justify positions we hold and determine our choices concerning the fundamental questions of life as well as our answers to them. Philosophy is saying that no topic is immune from discussion. Every issue needs to be critically examined in order to establish what is right to accept or reject.

3. The examination of the fundamental questions that affect human lives. Philosophy considers the question it asks to be very important. These questions are important for their own sake, that is, for the very reason that we are asking them. If in the process of asking these questions, philosophers are able to provide answers to them, then, the answers are also important, because, we as human beings are the better off for it.

Philosophy poses foundational questions that can help human beings to make sense of other levels of the activities in the society and universe. For instance, when the philosopher asks the basic fundamental question: How should I live my live among other human beings? This question creates immense opportunity to examine the gamut of ethics and social and political ideas and system developed by men to govern their affairs. At the political level we may recall the development of theories and ideologies such as democracy and its numerous variants, capitalism, socialism, communalism, communitarianism, communism, liberalism, among others. At the ethical level, we may note the development of theories for guiding human relations such as universalizability or categorical imperative, utilitarianism, virtue theory, egoism, altruism, reflexive morality or situation ethics, among others. Such ethical and political systems have had varying degrees of success but the point is that there has been some evolution and even progress in seeking new or better ways of making human beings to work together peacefully, and responsibly. Some of these theories and principles are employed in the quest for knowledge and decision making.

Usefulness of philosophical ideas to decision-making

Let us have some illustrations of the usefulness of a philosophical idea to decision making in daily human life. There is an idea called utilitarianism. It says that a rule or act or idea is good, accepted or recommended if it gives the greatest pleasure to the greatest number of people, or if the idea achieves the greatest good of the greatest number of person. Good in this sense may mean, happiness, freedom, human dignity, security, justice, fairness, peace, progress or any other positive value that is desired or sought after. As such this idea of the greatest good of the majority can be used in ethical or political life as a directing principle. When an individual in a position of power or authority such as class leader, a teacher, a Head of Department, a Vice-Chancellor, a State Governor, a President wishes to tackle a thorny issue, he may employ this philosophical principle as a tool, paradigm, construct or rule for managing a situation. One may ask: how does my action or inaction affect the interest or happiness of the greatest number of persons?

Another example can be supplied. There is a theory that seeking pleasure is the highest good or the end to which all men ought to aspire. The life of pleasure is ultimate end. Another theory says that when we are faced with the predicaments of life, we live in a calm, disciplined, indifferent way so that the vicissitudes of life do not trouble us. The former is a form of Epicureanism while the latter is Stoicism. So in a case whereby a human being faces an end of life issue; for instance, one is terminally ill with cancer and has few months to live. Such a person may utilize these principles to live out the rest of her biological life in a largely fulfilled and happy manner. The stoic philosophy will most likely make the sick person calmer, focused and capable of living the rest of her days more productively. Such a person may write a book, form a club of like-minded persons suffering the same ailment, put finishing touches to her plans and aspirations and generally make others around to be at ease. The same applies to the epicurean philosophy which will allow the sick person to use her remaining time and resources to put smiles on the faces of self and others, by doing things that will make the self and others happy and appreciative. Such a person may start a scholarship for indigent but brilliant students, give to charity, mend fences with erstwhile foes, help others to attain their aspirations, etc.

Again there is another way that a philosophical idea can be useful for decision making. We may use a philosophical idea to explain a social reality. Let us use the example of corruption that is a pervasive problem worldwide and especially in Nigeria. Egoism as an ethical theory says that something- an act or rule is right or good if it serves the interest of the self. Such a theory will help explain corruption as the action of a self- serving, selfish, greedy person who has little or no care for the next person around. An egoistic view of the universe is primitively counterproductive and eventually destroys the egoist himself.

In another example, we can use the theory of evil of Augustine to explain corruption. Evil is a kind of suffering, pain, cruelty and wickedness. Augustine argued that evil is a privation of the good. This means that all things are good by nature, but over time due to natural or other factors, such things may become corrupted. An orange fruit on the tree is good by nature, essentially as a fruit, but if it is left on the tree not plucked and overripe then it will become bad or corrupted naturally as a result of infection, infestation or damage. This damage or corruption is not because the orange is naturally bad but because there is a privation of the good such that once goodness departs or is compromised then evil or corruption will naturally set in to fill the void. So a corrupt man can be viewed as one who has suffered privation having been exposed to one or more of the ancestrally most corrupting influence; power, money or wine.

Using metaphors to deliver and explain philosophical ideas

Aphilosophical idea may also utilize Metaphors to deliver it didactic lesson. For example, we can refer to Plato’s philosophical theory of the three stages of things. When applied to knowledge it gives us (episteme versus two concepts of doxa) otherwise the gap between opinion, conviction and knowledge or sensitive, demonstrative and contemplative knowing. When applied to society it gives us the (guardians, auxiliaries and artisans) otherwise the leaders, soldiers and artisans or the metaphor of the human quality as precious metal in the society namely, gold, silver and bronze. When applied to human nature it gives us the distinction between body, mind or spirit and soul. Again just as Plato uses the metaphor of the precious metals as gold, silver and bronze to clarify the roles and functions of leaders and followers in the society, so we have other metaphors.

The idea is that induction can be a problem in daily life and also in science such that we ask: Is it rational to move from a few known cases to assert the knowledge of an unknown (inductive analogy) or any unknown (inductive generalization)? Or given the fact that the sun rose in the past as far as our memory recollects, does it mean that the sun will rise tomorrow? A philosopher used the example of a chicken. A man went to the market bought a hen. Every day, for ten days he gave it food and on the eleventh day the man came to visit the chicken and it was expecting food but the man brought out a knife and killed it for lunch. Another metaphor has to do with culture and human existence. Ortega Y’ Gasset on his part was suggesting that we see life as a sinking ship on the high sea and culture as our life boat or life jacket. The point is that there is nothing we can do about the predicaments of life. However, there is a lot that we can do about the way we try to cope or survive. So if our life boat or life jacket is torn or worn out then we cannot survive the sinking ship for any reasonable length of time. But if the life jacket is compact and adaptable then our chances of surviving in life becomes better. Sometimes philosophers use metaphors to explain reality and its challenges.

Basic techniques and tools of philosophy as a professional practice

What are the primary or basic tools or instruments that we require for doing philosophy? What are the main approaches to philosophy? Apart from the specific body of knowledge that we can refer to as philosophy, there are different methods of doing philosophy which is why we have many schools of thought. Despite this fact, it seems that philosophy has some basic ingredients. We are compelled to discuss some rudiments and received doctrines of philosophical knowledge, the higher goals and purpose of philosophical practice are to be comprehended. Let us briefly simply and clarify some of these. The central tools of philosophy include; criticism, argumentation, logicality, rigor and analysis. Philosophy is said to be critical because it determines or examines the good and bad sides of any position, idea or argument in order to break down the argument and allow us a well reasoned out justification for the choice of a position. Once we work out a justification, then it is couched in the form of an argument. An argument is made to defend or state a position. An argument is a piece of discussion in which a point is made and other points are made in support of the first point. Arguments are the central concern of philosophy. Philosophers use arguments as proofs to establish a position, to analyze facts, make a case, defend an action, oppose a claim, clarify an idea and generally make things meaningful to us.

An argument is made up of Premises and Conclusions. In an argument, we make a claim which is the conclusion and others claims are made in support of the first claim. These other claims are the premises. An argument is critical. When it is balanced it weighs the positive and negative sides of an issue. It provides reasons why every position should be accepted or rejected. In philosophy, we are not only interested in the position being held, we are even more interested in the argument made in support or against a position. An argument is based on inferences. Inferences are derivations, processes by which we move from one point to the other. Inferences show the logic or reasoning that determines how we make mental moves from one proposition to the next. An inference can be discovered by looking at the connections between the premises and the conclusion, that is, the way by which one statement leads to another. Arguments as part of the tools of philosophical practice help us to analyze issues. Analysis has to do with a sort of thinking that provides a detailed examination or explanation of an issue or problem. The main focus of analyzing is to breakdown the different aspects, consequences or dimensions of an issue or idea, with a view to making things understandable in a clear, simple and systematic manner.

It is easy to see then that every professional practice has its own basic physical and conceptual tools. Just as the tools of the medical practice might include the stethoscope, scalpel, drugs among others, the tools of the philosophical practice are basically conceptual, using arguments, inferences and criticism that the professional has learned and experienced over time. Glassheim (1973: 180) states that “an ability which a great many philosophers have is the ability to pull back from a situation, to observe its nature, and to examine it critically- in the broadest sense of criticism.” The philosopher uses the thinking faculty in getting knowledge. Reflection is the hallmark of the philosopher’s activity. To get philosophical knowledge one needs a well developed thinking capacity or reasoning. The faculty of reason or reasoning is pivotal to philosophical work. As such, our point is that the laboratory of the philosopher is the human mind. Analogically, just as the scientist does his field work outside empirically or observationally. The philosopher does his own work inside the brain or intellect. Moore (1935: 67 – 68) holds that the primary value of philosophy is not a practical but an intellectual one. We can say that philosophy does have a practical value, it should make us better men and women.” The method of philosophy should focus on “the great diversity of human activities and experiences, philosophical activity must take seriously not only the specific modes of human activity but also the various philosophical styles, schools and conclusions that contend for man’s attention and allegiance” (Parsons, 1975: 252).

Conceptual analysis as a method of philosophy

Conceptual reasoning is based two elementary components: These are simplification and clarification, which are ways of acquiring meaning. To simplify means to break down something into its fundamental or basic elements. To clarify means to show- clearly the breadth of an idea in order to explain, and so as to avoid confusions and ambiguity. To do a conceptual analysis you identify or pick an idea, define it and then pick out key words of that definition for in-depth study. The aim is that at the end of the exercise, your study of these key words will throw light on each of the words and then together the meaning of each word will provide a meaning for the first word that was defined. For example, let us look at the concept of justice. We define justice as desert- based on entitlement through effort, equalitybased in identical characteristics, equity- based on proportion or ratio, fairnessbased on non- bias or impartiality, merit- based on entitlement through status or identity, etc. The point is that each of these related concepts leads us to different meanings and analysis. However, all of them have to do with the basic idea of justice. Thereafter, we pick out these concepts and break the meaning of each of them down in a way that shows clearly the meaning of the original word, justice. There are two basic types of conceptual analysis: exhibition and replacement analyses. Exhibition analysis is as the term ‘exhibit’ suggests; which is to show openly the meanings of the notions or words embodying the idea in question.

Conclusion

Philosophy was seen as important because our world contained things known and unknown. We needed deep and thorough thought about the complexities. The belief was that we as human beings required philosophy to examine the intellectual foundation of our lives, to understand the nature of man and guide or decision making. Through philosophy we considered new possibilities and deepened our understanding of things in reality. Philosophy focused on the development of the minds and thoughts of people. Philosophy targeted the human mind. It improved the way people thought and acted. The way people acted on, and thought about issues affected positively or negatively the way they lived as human beings and how they related with others. Human beings became involved in the life of society by thought and action. Specifically, philosophy was interested in a critical and logical thinking that posed fundamental questions and broke down ancestral thought processes, stereotypes and prejudices so as to attain liberation and transformation. Given these aims and purpose of philosophy we saw clearly and easily the value of philosophy in enhancing our decision making by modifying our tastes, choices, ways of thinking and world views.

REFERENCES

Ayer, A. J. (1969). Metaphysics and Common Sense. London: Macmillan.

Bacon, F. (1972). The Four Idols. In (Ed.) John Herman Randall Jr. Justus Buchler & Evelyn Shirk edited. Readings in Philosophy, New York: Barnes and Noble. 91 – 101.

Baumgarten, E. (1980). The ethical and social responsibilities of philosophy teachers. Metaphilosophy. Vol.11. no. 2. 182 – 191.

Bodunrin, P. O. (1981). Philosophy: meaning and method. Ibadan Journal of Humanistic Studies. No. 1. April. 12 – 25.

Broad, C. D. (1964). What is Speculative Philosophy?. (Ed.) Bronstein, D., Krikorian, Y., Wiener, P. Basic Problems of Philosophy 3rd Edition. New Jersey: Prentice – Hall, inc. 616 – 619.

Bronstein, D. & Krikorian, Y. & Wiener, P. (1964). Basic Problems of Philosophy 3rd Edition (edited) New Jersey: Prentice – Hall, Inc.

Glassheim, P. S. (1973). New approaches to teaching and learning philosophy. Metaphilosophy. Vol.4. no. 2. 179 – 185.

Greetham, B. (2006). Philosophy. London: Palgrave.

Gyekye Kwame (1997). Tradition and Modernity. Philosophical Reflections on the African Experience. New York: Oxford University Press.

Jacques, M. (1964). An Introduction to Philosophy. Bronstein, D. & Krikorian, Y. & Wiener, P. Basic Problems of Philosophy 3rd edition edited. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, inc., 626 – 635.

McInerney, P. K. (1992) Introduction to Philosophy. New York: Harper Collins.

Moore, J. S. (1935). An approach to philosophy. Philosophy. Vol.10. no. 37. 60 – 70.

Okolo Chukwudum, B. (1993) African Social and Political Philosophy. Nsukka: Fulladu Publishing Company.

Omoregbe, J. I. (1998). African Philosophy: Yesterday and Today. In Chukwudi Eze (ed.) African Philosophy. An Anthology. Massachusetts: Blackwell. 3 – 8.

Oruka, O. H. (1990). Trends in Contemporary African Philosophy. Nairobi: Shirikon Publishers.

Parkinson G. H. R. (1988). What is Philosophy?. In G.H.R. Parkinson edited. An Enyclopedia of Philosophy. London: Routledge. 1 – 15.

Parsons, H. L. (1975). The philosopher and mankind’s struggle for value. Philosophy and phenomenological research. Vol. xxxvi. no. 2. December. 246 – 252.

Roth, J. & Sontag, F. (1987). The questions of philosophy. California: Wadsworth.

Samuel Viscount, Rt. Hon. (1956). Philosophy and the life of the nation, Philosophy. Vol. xxxi. No. 118. July. pp. 197 – 212.

Sinha, A. K. (1973). Meeting Ground of Philosophy and Science. Proceedings of the XVth World Congress of Philosophy. 17th – 22nd (September) Bulgaria, 111 – 117.

Sogolo, G. (1993). Foundations of Africa Philosophy. Ibadan: Ibadan University Press.

Stace, W. T. (1937). The place of philosophy in human culture. Philosophy. Vol. 12. 302 – 316.

Staniland, H. S. (2000). What is Philosophy. In Kolawole Owolabi (ed.) Issues and Problems in Philosophy. Ibadan: Grovacs Network. 3 – 10.