I think this is partly true. My views such as they are are fairly tentative, but I do have an interest in the subject and a disposition towards certain perspectives, and I do sometimes try to defend them.
I’m good with counting a path as an end: not necessarily a goal or destination or terminus, but a way. That’s closer to my thoughts, anyways, because I don’t think that there is an end to philosophy in the sense that we pack it up and go do other things. It’s not a puzzle to be solved.
I agree that we can’t just leave it at at. More must be said than “wisdom”.
But suppose:
That says a bit more, I think, because we surely have plentiful examples to draw from on what counts as foolishness. We can acknowledge that we’re striving for something – a path to consistency, say – and note that the reason for this striving is that we are deficient.
Here “wisdom” is more of a “minimizing my own foolishness, which I already know of plenty of examples from and so needs no conceptual definition”
If we were all Neoplatonists it seems to me that, somehow, we’d have come to a point where it’s not even worth questioning. There would not be a position “Neoplatonism” within philosophy so much as “the known true things that aren’t worth discussing”.
Oddly it’d de-emphasize the philosophical overtones of the philosophy – that of striving or reaching, while never living up to that goal or being able to rearticulate what we saw outside of the cave without thereby falling back into the shadows on the wall.
2 Likes