Philosophy and other rubbish

Judging by the way things are at Serbian universities, philosophy and humanities are sinking deeper and deeper into the mire of insignificance, and the ignorant Serbian government - judging by the behavior of female deans and deans close to the government - is thinking about abolishing some departments. first of all philosophy, of course, as the most useless of all useless things in this world, and immediately there is anthropology, for example, classical languages ​​or similar waste that cannot even be recycle, and it only eats money. Departments of philosophy barely recruit twenty students a year (and that's a lot, what do we need so many losers and parasites), while the classic languages ​​of the University of Belgrade (if the information is correct) last year enrolled one student (literally: one). Which is perfectly fine. After all, who needs ancient Greek and Latin? We don't even know modern Greek, what else is ancient Greek for us? Or God forbid Latin, which, after all, is written in Latin. With such ideas about abolishing the unnecessary - in contrast, for example, to the desperately needed stadiums (while the closeness of the nouns stadium and herd should not be overlooked at all) - there is an obligatory story about how money is saved in this way, and that the situation is not better either. elsewhere in the world. However, the money that goes to the departments of philosophy and humanities is at the level of statistical errors, and things in other areas are not as bad as they are in Serbia. The ignorant Serbian government is either not informed about how things are elsewhere (quite possible), or they are not telling the truth (which is quite certain). And it is enough to take a look at Slovenia, not so far away, where philosophy and the humanities are flourishing, not to mention the great philosophical scenes such as the French, German, Italian or increasingly interesting Scandinavian ones. Even in Russia, the situation is not as hopeless as in Serbia. Let's mention only Alexander Etkind and Oksana Timofeeva, and there are dozens more, of which it is not known who is more interesting than whom. To study philosophy, you don't need much more than a roof over your head (Aristotle even liked to walk with his students), benches and chairs if possible, possibly a blackboard and chalk. And yes, books too. Not, of course, the books bought by the Ministry of Culture - these are not books, but party trash - but books that, thanks to a smart cultural and educational policy, will be easily accessible to students. But no, philosophy should be abolished, along with some other disciplines.

The reasons for the government's negligence, even hostility to philosophy, are clear and least interesting. Philosophy creates free people, citizens who think for themselves, and every authoritarian structure is afraid of learned and free people. However, the question of where so many philosophers and humanistic scientists would be employed, what (and where?) would they do after completing their studies can be considered legitimate? This is, however, a weak question because, again, it is enough to look at how things are in less unfortunate areas than Serbia. In addition, the question of the excessive number of highly educated people is a coward's egg that has been sneakily introduced to the broad masses of the people and the honest intelligentsia since socialism (although the practice at that time, it must be admitted, was different). We only remember our worried uncles and aunts with a cold face, who chattered around wondering where all those mighty doctors, oh my god, who are produced by medical schools on tape, will get a job? But, look at the miracles, it was precisely the large number of newly produced doctors that created fine competition, and they had to compete, bite, learn and specialize, while the less valuable and less capable ones, logically, fell away. Back then, the doctors in the province were progressing, there were quality specialists and surgeons, so even in the province, unlike now, even a serious illness could be overcome. In other words, a free (and not party conditioned) space for the movement of learned people is a prerequisite for quality services and an acceptable life. The state, in such a constellation, is only a service that provides the legal framework and guarantees freedom.

But, the inattentive reader will say, one does not die from a lack of philosophy, or, what-do-I-know, anthropology, as one dies from a lack of red blood cells. Certainly. But something else is dying. Society's ability to orient itself and survive in the world is dying.

There are many places in modern free societies where philosophers find their place. Here is Slovenia, for example. They exist in large companies because companies care that there are those who will spot problems and oppose bad decisions. There are them in institutes because free societies need educated people who are able to publicly articulate the conditions for the possibility of freedom. They are found in political parties, because political parties are the lifeblood of free societies, and they need philosophers to think about the goals (in free societies, the goal of the party is not mere power, but the welfare of the community), to question the means (in free societies, violence - is it even that should we say? - not a means, but a criminal act), and looked at the chain of action. There they are in the well-arranged centers of culture where, at the expense of the state, they run debate clubs, because in free countries public discussions are the same as the defense cells of a healthy organism. There they are in the newsrooms of the free media, where it never occurs to them to bow their heads in front of bullies (like Janša). There are those who lead philosophical therapies that are significantly different from psychological and psychiatric ones. And all this because a trained philosopher, a trained humanistic scientist, knows how to see connections where the untrained eye cannot see them. And precisely the ability to perceive connections between seemingly unrelated things, people and phenomena, is traditionally called thinking.