philosophy question?

Doubt is the engine of all progress. What does this mean? Do you agree? Explain your reasoning. Can you think of an instance (either personal or historical) where doubt has in fact led to progress?

11 Answers

Relevance
  • Anonymous
    1 month ago

    I thought necessity was the mother of invention. Is this for a paper?

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • 1 month ago

    I rather think need is the engine of progress. Doubt may lead to research or exploration, but often that is the end in itself. Aha, you say, such and such really is true. How about that. Ok. Now, what's for lunch?

    • peter m
      Lv 6
      1 month agoReport

      Yes.. the reason something is true and The Consequence of that "routinely new thing".
      Sometimes it can be a consequence that it is much more novel, much more of an Emergency
      even more so than the virus Pandemic now sweeping the world. A War, famine, Tsuenami ,
      even the advent of Man-the-species.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • Git
    Lv 5
    1 month ago

    It depends on how the doubt is being applied. 

    If you doubt your capabilities, you might not try something new and therefore not ever progress.

    If you doubt what everyone takes to be a gospel truth just because someone said so, you will attempt to find the truth and discover something. E.g. people once thought if they sail beyond the horizon, they will literally fall off the world. Some people doubted those views and sailed beyond the horizon to discover a whole new world.

    So, if a doubt is holding you back, then it might impede your progress.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • 1 month ago

    Try doing ever same,with no changes then!THATS the losing game!

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • 1 month ago

    I wouldn’t have thought so.  Doubt impedes progress because you don’t think that such forward movement is possible. I would say that difficulty is the engine of progress, because it then spurns up on to find ways of doing things more easily, as as to invent, and to discover. 

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • P
    Lv 7
    1 month ago

    I would distinguish between doubt and curiosity. Doubt, I would suggest, impares progress as it reflects a lack of confidence and objectivity. Again you shouldn't confuse questions arising from the negativity of doubt with questions raised in the positivity of testing a premise to confirm its robustness.

    Doubt belongs with strengthening faith, not knowledge. Doubt reflects a subjective biase rather than thinking critically in search of an objective outcome. 

    I could argue that confidence is the engine of all progress. The confidence to admit that you don't know it all, that you were wrong, to reset what you believed you knew, and to start again with a little more experience, a better perspective, and maybe just a little more wisdom

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • 1 month ago

    No, "doubt" cannot be the engine-of-all-progress.

    Take philosophy as an Example. There are various Schools-of-philosophy in

    our education Environment so to speak.

    And if you learn TOO WELL from a bad one^^ ... that is a philosophy course

    which doesn't teach "doubt" at all but JUST ASSUMES that students may

    realise that such a philosophy course IS Taught AS IF it uses a doubtful or 

    critical Method.

    According to my experience few If Any college courses teach Philosophy

    as a DOUBTFUL & critical method. And by not-doing-so they have robbed

    all their students of the one thing that makes a Good philosophy education

    and a good course of study...

    the wonder & exhilaration^ of the search for knowledge.

    ^^ a bad Environment as-much-as a so called bad Philosophy School.

    ^ the behaviour required in such a search for knowledge. This can be spotted

      early too where we may call that behaviour "subjective philosophy behaviour"

      and later "objective philosophy behaviour". If I or anyone were to be selecting

      such candidates for this type of philosophy course then I would select not

      just those with the experience of "objective students", but would and should

      SELECT those other's who by DOING SOME PREVIOUS philosophy WORK

      show that symptomatic behaviour pattern (of application ; which may NOT

      be actually IN philosophy for example..  

    Source(s): Study of philosophy within the history of Ideas.
    • ...Show all comments
    • peter m
      Lv 6
      1 month agoReport

      It IS NOT & those religions who try to explain such "philosophy" are VERY MUCH MISTAKEN.
      And so are their followers, RELIGIOUS OR NOT.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • j153e
    Lv 7
    1 month ago

    To "doubt" is to be of two perspectives (PIE *dwo-, two).  A double-minded woman is unstable in all his ways, perhaps noting that there are three kinds of people: those who do the math, and those who don't.

    So there is wrong singleness of opinion, and right singleness of opinion, and there is being of two opinions (in the last 100 years, there are more multivariate logics, e.g. the three-valued logic which Pierce and later Post ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emil_Leon_Post ) initially began to develop; these have rapidly advanced in the last 100 years, almost in sync with physics and other sciences, e.g. multivariate calculus as applied to vector field analysis).

    So, the philosophical position classically tends to be willingness to consider the alternative (a la "two Jews, three opinions").

    Howbeit, "doubt" or being of more than one opinion about some thing, quickly moved from the rather mundane of the Roman era into the "fear and trembling" of the middle ages, and subsided again into questioning, as man gained more mastery over nature, and began a more material self-centered emphasis in the "Enlightenment" mode.  Romanticism therefore had more storm and stress, but in the previous Enlightenment mode of "it's all about me" ("Sorrows of Young Werther," etc.).  The Modern era reduxed "Enlightenmentism" with a kind of Victorian progress notion, and then Existentialism was back to "all about material me and how brave I am to know this."  Post-modernism has the swing back to Romanticish emo, with likely AI being the next rationalism (transhumanism, etc.).

    So, for you to answer the question, a) define "progress" (dollars; good feelings; etc.); then b) choose a personal example where you were, like the Little Engine that Could, able to keep on trucking (to mash two metaphors) until you achieved climbing that mountain.  Or, as your question seems to prefer the negative, choose Descartes' radical doubt until he finds something in which he believes (him being aware, as God Is Aware Being).  A third option:  "I doubt this woman will be exceedingly compatible, therefore I will not date her further."  That's progress even your male teacher would understand.  If your teacher or TA is a female, smile when you say that, or change the qualifier from "compatible" to "personally compatible."

    • P
      Lv 7
      1 month agoReport

      ;)

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • 1 month ago

    If you have no doubts, if you are absolutely sure you know all the answers, you will not inquire, you will not learn, and you will not progress.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • sam
    Lv 4
    1 month ago

    It means that because people have doubted things, they’ve gone away and done their own research and experiments, so they have drawn their own conclusions. These might be different from what others think. But only by questioning can we continue to learn.

    Hopefully that makes sense :)

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.