| Title | : | How the World Thinks: A Global History of Philosophy |
| Author | : | |
| Rating | : | |
| ISBN | : | 1783782285 |
| ISBN-10 | : | 9781783782284 |
| Language | : | English |
| Format Type | : | Hardcover |
| Number of Pages | : | 432 |
| Publication | : | First published October 1, 2018 |
How the World Thinks: A Global History of Philosophy Reviews
-
It would have been more appropriate to name this book 'How Some People Think' given it's largely the viewpoint of a middle-class Anglo-Saxon male. Women are dismissed with a summary comment ''women's voices are almost entirely absent from the world's classical traditions'. This is true but doesn't warrant leaving out the contributions of Indian women like Gargi, Maitreyi and Lopamudra who were well known for their learned and spirited debates with men and Greek women like Hypatia. It would have been interesting if Baggini had compared their thinking with the males.
The term 'Indian philosophy' is misleading, though to be fair it is also used by many Indians. The correct term is Vedic philosphy, for two reasons: it is found in many other countries in South and South-East Asia. Secondly, there are other philosophies in India including Buddhist, Jain, Muslim, Sikh etc.
Baggini presents Marx as influencing Gandhi by leading him to 'balance the traditional emphasis on spirituality with concerns for social justice'. It is more appropriate to say Marx might have influence Gandhi through his trenchant criticism of the 'barbarity of British colonial rule, its loot and torture, clearly acknowledging that “the misery inflicted by the British on Hindustan is of an essentially different and infinitely more intensive kind than all Hindustan had to suffer before'.
And Gandhi is unlikely to have supported the violent methods propagated by Marx and his followers.
The 'fabled spirituality' of which Baggini and countless others before him have highlighted is very much that: a fable. This is a myth which helps Westerners hide the fact that it was the fabled material wealth of India that has attracted traders and invaders from the West and elsewhere.
The book is replete with facile generalisations, e.g. the reference to extreme deference by Indians to authority which is contrasted with Western notions of argument and debate, all based on his experience in one conference. If Baggini had looked beyond his narrow view to the writings of historians and sociologists, it is the argumentative nature of Indians that has led to its amazing diversity. Amartya Sen, the Nobel-prize winning Indian economist, illustrated this in his book 'The Argumentative Indian'.
Baggini also refers to the 'resistance to secularism in the Islamic world'. There is no single Islamic model of government. Azerbaijan, Bangladesh, Indonesia and Turkey and others were historically secular states though there have been infringements in recent times.
Conversely, Western countries are not as secular as they claim to be. Western missionaries still invade other cultures seeking to buy converts under the guise of altruism and the only public holidays are those dedicated to Christian festivals.
True to form Baggini refers to the poverty of the part of India he visits. Equally true to form is the failure to discuss if he and others like him would be willing to pay fair prices for the goods and services extracted from India, Africa etc.
There are some moments of insight such as the quote that philosophers live in two times and two places. But they are lost in a morass of unstructured arguments peppered with many irritatingly predictably generalisations and stereotypes.
The book definitely required a good editor who has some knowledge of the content and the ability to cull ruthlessly! -
Reading this book aloud in the car, discovering gems together over Kopi and Roti Prata, letting a stranger skim through it just before the start of a lecture, discussing it with my boss after a workshop, trying to explain its gist to a curious 7-year-old. These were my favourite memories of reading this one.
And as I travelled for work and play, through car and taxi rides, brought it from café to café, drunk cups of Caramel Latte/Kopi-C Peng/Genmaicha while I nibbled on doughnuts, woke up early to get some chapters in before starting on work, gave thanks for late turn-ups and having to wait for the little one at ballet classes that let me pore through the book, Baggini took me through East Asia, Europe, America and Africa, through the ages from the time of Confucius, Socrates and Buddha to the world of today.
I took a long time to get through this one because it kept me pausing to reflect and rexamine my own thinking and what has shaped it. Often I found myself needing to reach out to discuss with other minds. And now, having completed it, I feel simultaneously nourished and hungry. Gratifying read -
Ever since I began teaching philosophy in the 1990's I've tried to expand the canon and to include non-Western elements in my teaching. These movements have gained momentum more broadly in the academy in recent years, and so I've been trying to expand my understanding so I can be a better philosopher and a better teacher. I hadn't yet seen a good introductory text one might use for global philosophy.
And this book still isn't that, but it quite good. This is not a book one could assign in an intro class, because it requires some familiarity with philosophical traditions, but it is a fascinating exploration in comparative philosophy.
Baggini writes that the different philosophical traditions are different, with different emphases, ideas, and values. And that you can't just pick and choose from those traditions, you need to understand how the ideas hang together and have developed through history.
But he does believe that the various traditions can learn from each other and can see how one might think differently if different ideas are emphasized. Plus, he thinks this is the way the world is going anyway, with globalization bringing the various cultures into closer communication, such that in the future global philosophy will be a cross-cultural conversation with roots in the various traditions.
One feature of the book that was enjoyable was the way he discussed contemporary events--such as the election of Donald Trump or the policies of Xi Jinping--through the lens of their culture's philosophical traditions.
My only negative feedback is that some of the chapters and sections could have been edited and structured differently. And a few others could have been expanded.
But overall I found this a very helpful guide in understanding how our current world thinks and what it's primary values are. -
I so wanted to learn from this book; Understanding philosophies from around the world sounded quite interesting and it grabbed my attention at the bookstore and no doubt the author’s experience is extensive, but the writing just didn’t invite me in to learn and understand. To be fair, i enjoyed a number of parts of the books, such as the chapter on Japanese relational self and the anecdotes that illustrate it. But he jumps around way too much for me and I found myself skimming more often than I prefer.
-
There are a few reasons to read this moderately-sized work from Julian Baggini on philosophy from around the globe, and a few more reasons not to read it.
Firstly, this book does more in one volume than any I have encountered to treat the philosophical thought of India, China, Japan, and the Muslim world as genuine philosophy without pedantically and in condescendingly unlettered fashion equating any of that with mysticism, theology, or spirituality. Though there certainly is overlap from philosophy in those fields, "The East," is hardly the only area where this happens. Also, Baggini does lay out a lot of these concepts very clearly so those with little experience in this area will be mostly caught up on the history and appropriate terminology. Lastly, the function of philosophy in these regions on the larger cultural zeitgeist and more practically that societies' political and social functioning is well-detailed.
Where the book has issues is mainly the speed with which it works in all of these areas. I can certainly give the work the benefit of the doubt as it treads where few philosophy texts for the layman have, however because so much history and philosophy is discussed within a mere 400 pages there are some sweeping generalizations and simplifications. Even though Baggini is providing a service by showing this work in equal light as, "Western," philosophy without resorting to the soft-bigotry of relativist pandering; by talking about so much in a single volume there are some culturally stereotypical remarks thrown around that have the best of intentions but a somewhat numbing effect on the reader (at least this one). These instances are few but certainly noticeable upon rereading especially.
So while I really don't find this to be, "A Global History of Philosophy," it did serve as an effective expository work for several areas of philosophy which I have not found in many other works for the layman. Likely, this would have been much more effective as a series, giving a volume in that series to each culture/philosophical tradition discussed. In short, he certainly accomplishes the goal of introducing several concepts and inspiring you to look for more sources, but he also makes you think that much more seeking and finding should have been possible within this volume itself. -
5 stars for the first two parts, 3.5 stars for the other parts, 4.5 for the concluding thoughts
1. I learned a great deal about what makes different philosophies so distinctive. I’ll probably keep coming back to this book as a reference guide.
2. Topics were treated with the right amount of depth & breadth, though African and Aboriginal philosophies were only ever addressed as an afterthought and didn’t even make it to the final summary of How the World Thinks
3. I loved the way Baggini linked his personal anecdotes to profound philosophical premises
4. This book is like listening to a well-read person who has already made a really good point but wants to keep adding more information (I thought the book was finished about 4 times before it actually was) -
Are you looking for a book that introduces the cultures of the east? Overall is a good book that teaches some of the cultures of the east and the way they think and reasoning based on philosophy.
-
There have been few times I've clicked the "five star" option as quickly as for this book. 'How the World Thinks' has moved me in ways I did not anticipate through shining a light on philosophies from East Asia to the subcontinent of India and from the Islamic world to Western philosophy. It included a very neat distinction between European and American philosophy I did not see coming but phrased all the floating ideas I had about why North-America (and the US in particular) occasionally confuses me to no end.
This book connected all these different strains of philosophy (not forgetting oral histories from around the world) by focusing on a few key questions when trying to figure out "how the world thinks". It helped me start to understand other cultures and gave me a newfound perspective on my own. In short: it has "wow'ed" me and I highly recommend it.
Quote from the very end of the book:
"Inattention to the peculiarities of a philosophy's own place and to philosophy in other places confuses the admirable aspiration for greater objectivity with a misguided ideal of placeless universality. Ideas are neither tightly tethered to specific cultures nor free-floating, universal and placeless. Like people, they are formed by a culture but can travel. If we truly aspire to a more objective understanding of the world, we have to make use of the advantages to be gained by occupying different intellectual places. Doing so with reverence but not deference to the past and present of other cultures could help us transform our own philosophical landscapes." -
A book on, well, how people think around the world. At least assuming that the countries' philosophies reflect onto the people (and vice versa). Not the most rigorous approach, and the author's western bias can be noticed at several places, even though he specifically critiques western philosophy of doing exactly that.
That being said, the book did give me an idea of which values the various Indian, Muslim, Chinese, Japanese, (native) Australian and some African countries' philosophies. One thing that stookd out was that western philosophy, which we arrogantly simply call "philosophy", is the only type of philosophy treated in this book that relies solely on logical argumentation (which is not necessarily a good thing), whereas feeling, perception, religion and subjectivity takes on a larger role in almost every other philosophy (again, out of those treated in this book). -
Capturing the wisdom of this book in a review is next to impossible. The mind-expanding collections of philosophies really paint a beautiful picture of the world. The differences between individual freedom and social harmony explain the shortcomings of the western ways of thinking. The idea of total responsibility of the self that is becoming more common around the world is broken down. For it is ignorant to assume that the self is something indepentent. This book is one of the best summaries of the different ways of thinking I have ever read!
-
Some interesting bits but not as insightful, engaging or wide-reaching as I'd hoped.
-
'How the World Thinks' is an academic book that defines the basic/historical understanding of concepts, such as time, logic, self, relationships, society and much more, in Western and Eastern cultures. The book is written by a classical philosopher and discussed from the academic standpoint, and thus should be treated as academic material. Therefore, you should not expect to have an easy read and learn about concepts that would shake your understanding of the world or other cultures, instead, you will be welcomed by referenced materials of classical literature and thoughts on how the world was perceived by people many centuries ago and how that still translates in the modern world, our views, religions, politics etc.
The book depicts HISTORICAL points of thinking and seeing the world. So yes, it mainly covers the views of male philosophers, but if you are familiar with the general understanding of classical philosophy, female works/discussions and ideas were not documented to the same extent; therefore, claiming that the book didn't cover the female point of view is rather silly, as there is just not enough evidence to objectively clarify the views of that side. (I am not saying that there are non, as I am not part of this field, I cannot make such claim, however, from what I have learned in the classes of philosophy and discussion, everyone usually states that basis of understandings and questionings of the world in the Western side comes from Greek philosophers - Aristotle, Socrates, and their fallowers etc.).
Anyhow, about the book itself. It was not an easy read, especially because I was listening to the book, instead of reading paper form (so references were a bit of a nightmare); however, it was well versed and discussed from the Western and Eastern point of view by not placing the highlight on the comparison of both but by explaining on how both are more similar than we are lead to believe. Some discussions may be triggering to some people, as they are historical understandings, and do not stand the same grounds as moderns views on the world anymore, but it is important to note, that discussions are based on academic understandings of philosophy and religion, thus just different.
It gave me some information to analyse on my own accords. I do not consider that this book is meant to change your understanding or thinking of the world; however, it does provide many nice bread crumbs for your enjoyment, or discussion with your friends, colleagues or peers.
so... just think about...
HOW FAR HAVE WE COME FROM WHAT WE WERE, AND WHERE ARE WE GOING WITH WHAT WE HAVE?! -
It is a strange irony that at the beginning of this book Baggini points out that there are many cultures which have no need for secular philosophy. Many languages didn't organically develop a word for it until it was imported from the West and their home-grown scholars follow "philosophical" traditions that don't meet the purity test of philosophy being too close to theology. This raises the interesting question of whether modern secular philosophy actually has a history at all in any part of the world, let alone a global one. Have societies really tolerated such useless spongers for 2,500 years or were the schools of Athens and the great thinkers in other cultures pre-Enlightenment doing something fundamentally different to today's philosophy departments?
The answer would appear to be the latter and whilst Baggini tries to downplay the practical and theological aspects in the work of, say, Aristotle, it rapidly becomes obvious that modern Western philosophy has sprouted from the impractical and useless results of the pursuit of technical knowledge (science), higher purpose in life (theology) and community cohesion (traditional stories) amongst others; it comes from the dead-ends of intellectualism if you will. Things which had practical application eg capitalism or psycho-analysis rapidly disassociated themselves from philosophy and the narrow, inflexible, arbitrary constraints of axioms, propositions and inductive reasoning - i.e. rationality.
Whilst navel-gazing has a long tradition (cf the book of Ecclesiastes), it clearly hadn't been tolerated by any society on a large scale until the wealth and abundance of 18th century Europe allowed such wasters to make a living spouting drivel of no practical use to anyone. I'm heartened to read that many societies reject secular philosophising even to this day and can only hope that in the West we will also come to our collective senses and realise that it is a fool's errand to derive meaning or anything of practical benefit to the world by reason and/or logic alone. -
"Offering deep insights into how different regions operate, and their commonalities as well as their differences, Baggini shows that gaining greater knowledge of how others think is the first step to a better understanding of ourselves"
First, let's appreciate the beautiful patterns and colours of the cover! Second of all, this took me a while to read. It was a struggle as I couldn't focus on the info. It was hard to get into with so much info as if Baggini had expected me to already know what everything means, but I just had no clue. I didn't gain much knowledge about other areas of the world as much as I wanted to because Baggini just totally lost me.
I thought this would be a book that was engaging, some parts were intriguing and made sense, but a lot of the time I was thrown off. Lets just say, at the start of each chapter, I could follow what was being said, after a few pages that was it, I was lost. It was just a lot of throwing out names and places and other things which I'm glad to see other readers (in the 2 star reveiews) also picked up on and shared the same thoughts as me. It's written more for people who already have knowledge of such topics.
I didn't learn as much as I wanted to, I was only really able to digest what I already had a grasp of, like karma, for example. Other than that, perhaps I should re-read this book when I get a better grasp of different philosophies.
So yeah, though this book had the potential to be really interesting, I couldn't enjoy it. It just felt like a lot of information being thrown on the page in brief detail without much exploration. I feel like I've been extremely critical but I really did struggle to enjoy it. If I had more of an idea on the content of philosophy, I think I would have enjoyed this book more, appreciated it more and learnt something. What sounded like an interesting book hardly held any interest to me. -
Awesome book with some flaws. Great for understanding different views of different topics, made me think a lot about what I think is absolutly normal. Was pretty mind-shifting. Also it is well written, I could understand most of the concenpts easily
The flaw: There are almost no female voices, it is also centered around "western" and "eastern" philosophy (India, China, Japan), this was a bit sad but I could understand the authors from 2000 years ago where probably all male and I can't judge how much scripture from different regions is available from this time. -
A comparison of western and eastern philosophy highlighting strengths and weaknesses of respective beliefs. I found it a great look at multiple philosophies for a first time reader of any philosophy book. Don't expect an ultimate conclusion on what to believe but convincing case for the idea that our western philosophy isn't the most superior
-
Livro complexo e difícil de entender sem uma base prévia. Senti que no final, quando ele faz um resumo de tudo, foi melhor do que os capítulos longos e extensos. Mas, interessante a leitura para compreender mais sobre a filosofia do oriente, em contraponto da ocidental que é mais difundida.
-
How The World Thinks by Julian Baggini is subtitled “A global history of philosophy”. I was expecting a cross-cultural, militias-faith tour of the topic, rather like Bertrand Russell‘s History of Western Philosophy without the direction. What Julian Baggini has assembled here, however, is something that initially surprised, but later rather disappointed as a result of a necessity to revisit similar concepts repeatedly.
So what exactly is How The World Thinks? Well, it is something like a tour brochure for the philosopher of the history of ethics and morals, both geographically and through time. Organized thematically, rather than by author, culture or history, its chapters deal with concepts such as logic, time, unity, virtue and impartiality, quoting and contrasting ideas from Western philosophy alongside examples from other cultural and religious traditions, especially Hindu, Buddhist, Confucian, Muslim, and Shinto, and occasionally from oral perspectives. The result is always interesting, but also sometimes frustrating in that ideas presented do sometimes become a procession, the lack of critical discussion takes most that is offered as read and without critical analysis of the messages from the banners carried by the protagonists. There is also, sometimes for this reader, too much condescension to the arbitrary assumptions that underpin religions. Overall, How The World Thinks would not be of much interest to logical positivists!
Personally, I have a problem with the interface between religion and philosophy. For me there always seems to be a leap of faith - rather obvious isn’t it? - that precludes serious critical analysis. “We don’t all die” were the words of a broadcast bishop recently in the United Kingdom, implying that those of a good life (equals conforms to his interpreted prescriptions] will be saved for all eternity. This is not bad for a faith that promises to respect and deal equally with all humanity. Of course, there is individual behavior to be accounted for, but the implication of the bishop’s words are that anyone who is perfectly faithful but not a Christian will be excluded from eternal life (an ambition which, it has to be said, has not one iota of evidence to suggest it might exist…)
I have digressed to illustrate a major frustration with How The World Thinks. Throughout, I wanted the descriptions of other cultures’ and other religions’ ideas to be addressed critically, but throughout they were merely cataloged. It’s interesting and engaging and indeed informative, to such an extent that I would recommend the book to anyone interested in the subject. It is always easy to criticize something for what it is not.
Julian Baggini’s explanation of Yin Yang, for instance, is a beautiful account of how these colloquial opposites are in fact complementary. Baggini’s quotes about the esoteric and exoteric in relation to Islam makes sense only to a believer: to a rationalist it is entirely the wrong way around. Elsewhere discussion of a compromise between extremes is marred by a misinterpretation of the meaning of the mathematical average. And late in the book, dealing with impartiality, when Baggini says that the Western tradition does not look kindly on those in public life who make advantageous space for members of the family, he ignores the fact that unless the family of an American president, it seems, are exempt.
Overall How The World Thinks does what it says and despite its being rarely analytical, it is always informative, especially in relation to the Confucian and Hindu philosophies. -
Review This book is excellent at getting you to question the way in which you think and how this underpins your belief system in regards to life. Western thinking with its colonial racism often views its scientific enquiry for truth and progress as superior to eastern respect for knowledge and tradition. Where in the east focus is on the holistic view of reality, the west are argument based, logical and scientific. Western scientific enquiry admonishes knowledge in search for new understanding and asks questions to extend knowledge, whereas eastern thinking respects tradition and the divine. Before the internet we had to trust those more knowledgeable than ourselves and so the technological advancement making education more accessible can be argued to be detrimental, as there is with it a lack of experience; knowing something and understanding something fully, are not the same. Implied causation and actual causation are not the same. Eastern thought is less focused on conceptual understanding and more on feeling and intuition, which the west often disregard as being unscientific; words are for meaning: when you’ve got the meanings, you can forget the words. Although just because you can posit a question does not make it testable, for example ‘what is the colour of the wind?’ will likely lead to no answer because there simply isn’t one, therefore the other questions we ask may be similarly futile. Eastern society values right conduct, politeness and harmony with others and unlike the west are not affronted by their limitations but celebrate their humanness; they see a person is only so through other people. The east see things differently; they focus on the space between things and are sensitive to changes in background whereas the west don’t notice empty spaces as their focus is on the foreground. Europe can be seen as an aggressive culture who sees other societies in decline or poorer and weaker than they, as they merit progress and individualistic advancement and yet it is due to this that we will likely kill ourselves off with consequences such as climate change. The west rejects the importance of theology and how religious buildings are machines for people to think. Eastern cultures may lack technological and societal advancement but they can be argued to be superior due to their capacity for sustainable survival. The western mind is dichotomous and inflexible in its thinking and the antagonistic spirit of enquiry antithetical to cooperation and seeking common ground; it is focussed on winning arguments often to a cavalier ilk. There is often a common sense approach that distrusts intellectuals and has popular discontent with elites. The focus on democracy and where the majority vote is the truth often illustrates groupthink and mediocracy and explains why communism never prospers. That said, corrupt people are tolerated if they are capable of moving things forward as virtue which bears no fruits is useless. Westerners enjoy thinking for themselves as this makes them feel they have a freedom to direct their own lives whereas Easterners have a fatalism in relation to karma. The west are the truth seekers who are not satisfied with conceptual vagueness whereas the east are the way seekers who believe skills come from practise and cannot simply be conveyed by instruction. A very thought provoking book however it was very dense and somewhat superfluous at times; the start is better than the end.
-
I read this in the wee hours of the night, a lullaby composed of fragments of musings over existence and ethics from around the world, if you will. It is only natural to wake up in the middle of disjoint dreams and muse over it myself.
Baggini is annoyed with Western-philosophy dumping the prefix altogether and presuming that the tradition's particular ways of conceiving the world, namely, the spirit of reaching out for a single, final truth through the methods of reductionism, empiricism and rationality, are the only ones that are to be taken seriously. Thus, he sets out to seek what others have on offer, and his journey is primarily focused upon India, China, Japan and the Islamic World (considered in terms of religion rather than region) with cursory glances at Africa and tribal cultures. Thus it is not so much as 'How the World Thinks' as 'How South/East Asia and Muslims Think'.
Nevertheless, he finds a coherent way to structure his itinerary, grouping ideas by sub areas of philosophy : Epistemology, Ontology and so on, and exploring concepts under each of these as offered by different parts of the world. Thus we have chapters titled Pragmatism (America), Karma (India), Harmony (China) and so on, to delve into a unique theme and its resonances across cultures.
The writing style almost wholly consists of citing primary sources or experts, which gives the text the flavour of a compendium and leaves little or no space for an original voice. Thus it is a comparative study, an exercise in descriptions, and not a personal thesis, except perhaps a vague 'problems with the Western way of life and how might we profit by listening to others'. You might find your interest waning intermittently for lack of a driving wit unless you are sufficiently invested in looking through his binoculars upon the broad landscape of philosophy, or rather in this case, philosophies. -
I find myself a little disillusioned after finishing this book.
First off all, the book is hardly “how the world thinks”, Russia is left largely undiscussed (as casually noted by the author in the last few pages) and the approach of the book is still very much from a male western viewpoint.
Furthermore, the book uses very many words to not say that much at all. I grant that such a complaint might be mostly blamed on me potentially missing some of the authors more nuanced arguments (not being particularly well versed in philosophy).
Lastly, the approach is so extremely general that many of the ideas discussed will, at least on the surface, already be known by anyone interested to read this book. I do however appreciate that such points can still be valuable in two ways; first in making you examine and contemplate them (again) and secondly because you can learn to appreciate and understand them better.
All in all 2.5/5 would not necessarily recommend. -
I wish did read this book long ago! However, it is a recent book but the amount of knowledge here did reshape many of my ideas and understanding of how this world is. While the language is more academic and not easy to consume, I was enjoying the slow reading and constructing ideas one after another. The main conclusion of the book that the human perspective is unlimited to a certain philosophy. The world is a diverse place for ideas and the human mind. is much more than concepts such as logic and traditions. I highly recommend this book for anyone who needs to get over the premade ideas of Western philosophy. How the world thinks is a question of understanding the differences and not just the patterns.
-
What a philosophical journey!
We've all heard, read and learned about what makes the Western Philosophy Canon. What Julian Baggini achieves here is a journey through Chinese, Indian, African (even Samoan) philosophy perspective on many topics like "emptiness", "morality" and so on.
It's incredibly well written and easy to digest, but you will surely have to stop and do a lot of side reading given the amazing interest of so many of the perspectives discussed.
Will definitely re-read at some point in time. -
It was eye-opening to notice that the way we think about philosophy in the west tends to be limited to western philosophers. Another surprise came from how philosophy in many countries is much more closely attached to religion and practical cultural norms rather than being a separate thought exercise to ”solve” life.
The point-of-view of philosophy is a good addition when aiming to better understand cultural differences across the globe. -
A very interesting comparative study of world philosophy, I found the portions about Japanese and Chinese culture and modes of thought especially fascinating. Will probably be something I need to reread in order to get the most out of it. Must say I gave a wee whoop at the mention of Rawls and his veil of ignorance- my favourite lesson of University philosophy study. :)
-
Writing a book on global philosophy is an inherently impossible task because not every societies' philosophical traditions will be covered. The purpose of this book however is to show how learning about philosophy from different regions of the world is an enriching intellectual and personal experience.
More philosophers need to do these sorts of inquiries!
