Hi papasmurf.

Before I attempt to answer your question, can I ask you a few questions so that I can understand a little better what angle you're coming from?

First: I assume, based on what little you've said and what others have said, that your question can be elaborated upon as such: "Do philosophers and philosophy classes have any use in people's day-to-day lives going about the normal physical tasks of life?"

Would that be a fair assessment? If not, can you change that to elaborate more on what you're asking?


Second: You've defined "practical" as "being useful for physical tasks"--physical tasks being such things as acquiring food, building houses, healing wounds, and so forth. Yet we have other tasks in life--"mental tasks". We constantly have to make decisions (even when we are performing physical tasks) and deliberate on which options would be best to choose. We are bombarded with opinions and claims and we constantly have to evaluate the evidence for those claims, determine if we consider them correct or not before we accept them. We are faced with moral decisions on a daily basis, some more critical than others, and we have to decide how we are going to act. These are all mental tasks.

Do you consider study of a subject that is "useful for mental tasks" as not being practical? Or would you concede that study of a particular subject is practical if it is "useful for physical or mental tasks"?


Third: By defining "practical" as "useful for physical tasks" you're leading us to believe that you consider physical tasks the only things worth pursuing, and mental tasks as worthless. Considered from a career perspective, that would mean you consider mechanics, construction workers, garbage collectors, etc. (those who work at physical tasks) as performing the only worthwhile jobs, while those who mostly perform mental tasks for a career, such as accountants, school teachers, lawyers, legislators, mathematicians, many research scientists, as performing worthless jobs.

Is that an accurate assessment of your position? If not, please clarify.


Fourth: By the way you've phrased your question and your terse replies, you seem to be implying that if something is of no practical use, that is, if it does not help you in your performance of physical tasks, then it is worthless and you should not waste your time on it.

Again, is that an accurate assessment of your position? If not, please clarify.


Lastly: You obviously watch fictional television shows. What is the practical use of that? What practical use is there in viewing fictional movies or reading fictional books? Or, to put it in your words, how is reading or viewing fiction "useful for a physical task". And if they are not practical (by your definition) why do you engage in those activities? Why would you go see a movie, watch a television drama or comedy if it has no practical use?


Thanks
--Dan