Philosophy Forum

Read Topic
Reply

Can a philosopher be a good partner?

Philosophy Forum
» General Discussion
» Can a philosopher be a good partner?

Get Email Updates • Email this Topic • Print this Page

I often doubt whether a philosopher can be a better partner. A philosopher has little time for his or her partner. Landownership is romantic, sensuous and mutual and a philosopher has little time for if he socializes too much he or she kind of cannot give time for academic persuasions in life.

A normal partner always fantasizes free moments to revel in a world of dreams and imagination but having someone who always engages in philosophical or academic domains becomes rather uninviting.

Maybe I will be opposed here. But this is an open discussion forum and I feel at liberty to put forward my beliefs or thoughts

@haribol acharya,

haribol acharya;154756 wrote:

I often doubt whether a philosopher can be a better partner. A philosopher has little time for his or her partner. Landownership is romantic, sensuous and mutual and a philosopher has little time for if he socializes too much he or she kind of cannot give time for academic persuasions in life.

A normal partner always fantasizes free moments to revel in a world of dreams and imagination but having someone who always engages in philosophical or academic domains becomes rather uninviting.

Maybe I will be opposed here. But this is an open discussion forum and I feel at liberty to put forward my beliefs or thoughts

The classic philosopher/thinker is one of the personality profile i study in my spear time. According to the Myer Briggs system, INTP typify the thinker as a person that spend all his/her thinking about theoretical models. In the enneagram system, the thinker is identified by "type 5" as someone who is insecure about the world, and as such, put all his effort in the act of studying obscure subject matters to gain "confidence". This is a very rare type, and the people in this forum are tend to be from ennagram 4, and 7. These people tend to value "feelings". Their typical answer to your question will typical be very emotional.

Now, if you are thinking about spending the rest of your lifetime study. I suggest you don` t. The feeling of being lonely is not good. It is painful. Get some friends, and get nice girl friend you can **** is what makes life worth something.

@TuringEquivalent,

Maybe you are right. In fact different people have passions for different things. There are certain things we must consider. If we become too much engrossed in books and never care about our partners' interests or passions they are likely to astray and we can be singled out.

Time must be divided between different passions. But at times philosophers try to isolate themselves wordily activities as their passions for knowledge are overpowering and they fail to maintain their relationship

@haribol acharya,

One could say the same not only for philosophers, but most likely any other creative class of people; but are such generalisations really reflective of all the actual instances of such relationships, given the almost infinite variety we find in human relationships, or are they rather a picture composed by using the most extreme cases?

@haribol acharya,

maybe a 'good' philosopher would make a 'good' partner and a 'bad' philosopher would make a 'bad' partner.

if a person has spent enough time thinking as well as observing and experiencing, and actually reached some conclusions and gained some knowledge-and having insight would be a plus-then why would they not be a fine partner? but it goes without saying that this type person may choose to have a like-minded partner.

i have noticed, on the other hand, that i make the mistake sometimes in thinking too much about things, and it is helpful to have a partner who will get me out of my own head and into the world again.

there are a lot of factors that determine who would be the best partner for someone in life. the level or frame of mind is only one issue, and some issues need to be opposites. in total, i think ideal partners should complement each other and balance their strengths and weaknesses.

@haribol acharya,

haribol acharya;154756 wrote:

I often doubt whether a philosopher can be a better partner. A philosopher has little time for his or her partner. Landownership is romantic, sensuous and mutual and a philosopher has little time for if he socializes too much he or she kind of cannot give time for academic persuasions in life.

A normal partner always fantasizes free moments to revel in a world of dreams and imagination but having someone who always engages in philosophical or academic domains becomes rather uninviting.

Maybe I will be opposed here. But this is an open discussion forum and I feel at liberty to put forward my beliefs or thoughts

Philosophy may be the path to love? understanding, controling, proving.
If i thought philosophy was empty of love i would not put so much time and thought into it.
Philosophy teaches to be a better person is worth effort.
But what you say may be true, alot of philosophers are hermits,
but are they alone or lonely with their philosophy?

@jgweed,

jgweed;154847 wrote:

One could say the same not only for philosophers, but most likely any other creative class of people; but are such generalisations really reflective of all the actual instances of such relationships, given the almost infinite variety we find in human relationships, or are they rather a picture composed by using the most extreme cases?

Amen to this sentiment. When I married young I married to somoene who was not creative, abstract, or even intellectually ambitious. And spent several miserable years with her not being able to share anything deeper than a schedule and a bed. Now I have found a lady who writes, paints, practices martial arts etc..., we may not have the exact same interests but we have an understanding of how the other thinks and an appreciation for the other's mental well being and need to share ideas, take creative time out for one's self, not to be mocked, etc... Also we don't find each other pretentious or pedantic just because we may not understand a thought process, or use a non-standardly coloquial vocabulary.

@haribol acharya,

haribol acharya;154756 wrote:

I often doubt whether a philosopher can be a better partner. A philosopher has little time for his or her partner. Landownership is romantic, sensuous and mutual and a philosopher has little time for if he socializes too much he or she kind of cannot give time for academic persuasions in life.

Nietzsche write, "To live alone one must be an animal or a god, says Aristotle. There is yet a third case: one must be both--a philosopher."
But I think you too narrow about what 'good partener' is. Traditional relationship good for some people, maybe, but as many good kind of relationship as people. Everyone unique.

Is like when people say, "If you do not have family, you not live happy life." Never thinking that maybe some people find happiness in other place, and maybe family even make them unhappy. In same way some people not needing a lot of emotional support or time - some people okay to see eachother just some time. Just because you love somebody does not mean they having to be most important thing in life. And pretending person is more important than they are to you come back to hurt you end the end.

If I am married with man I love, and a lot of time he want to spend time with friend instead of me, I am not feeling bad because of this. Is the same way if maybe a man want to read instead of spend time with me. I do not expect to become sole focus of anyone life, or even main focus. We together to help eachtother, not take eachother life over. Is disrespectful, I think, to expect anything else. If I really care about other person happiness, I think about wanting to do; and he think about what I wanting to do. And if we have to do some thing apart - this is okay, too.

Western people idea of 'romance' I think is crazy fiction. Try to find impossible thing you only get hurt and disappointed. Look for happiness in real world, not in outlandish fantasy.

@haribol acharya,

I asked my wife to comment on the idea that a philosopher is a poor partner, here's what she said,

"I don't think so. It makes for interesting conversation. But there are no simple answers and one can't simply answer a question - it almost always gets complicated."

hehe - maybe thats' just for being my wife, rather than the partner of a_philosopher. Who knows.

@haribol acharya,

haribol acharya;154756 wrote:

I often doubt whether a philosopher can be a better partner. A philosopher has little time for his or her partner. Landownership is romantic, sensuous and mutual and a philosopher has little time for if he socializes too much he or she kind of cannot give time for academic persuasions in life.

A normal partner always fantasizes free moments to revel in a world of dreams and imagination but having someone who always engages in philosophical or academic domains becomes rather uninviting.

Maybe I will be opposed here. But this is an open discussion forum and I feel at liberty to put forward my beliefs or thoughts

The answer to the title question is, "yes". You seem to be confusing someone who does one thing and nothing else with someone who does something and might do other things. Suppose, for example, we are talking about a philosopher who spends an average of two hours a day contemplating philosophy (which is a romanticized way of putting it). That still leaves 22 hours in which to do other things, and the person may be sociable or not, friendly or not, etc., during those other hours.

Also, one might follow Socrates' example and have philosophical discussions, which are inherently social experiences.

If looking for a spouse, I would neither require nor reject someone based on whether the person was a philosopher or not. I would want someone kind and reasonable, which is compatible with, but does not require, being a philosopher.

Now, before getting some lame response about not wanting to be with someone who never has thought about anything philosophical, I want to remind people that not everyone who has painted is an artist (otherwise, everyone who finger painted in kindergarten is an artist), and likewise, not everyone who has thought about something philosophical is a philosopher.

Philosophy Forum
» General Discussion
» Can a philosopher be a good partner?

Read Topic
Reply

Philosophy Forum

Can a philosopher be a good partner?

Quick Links

My Account

able2know