The Ignorant Confidence Or Why We Doubt Philosophers But Trust Ourselves

“The unexamined life is not worth living.”

—Socrates

Philosophy often feels like stepping into a dimly lit room filled with echoes—whispers of past thinkers bouncing off the walls of contemporary discourse.

If you’ve ever discussed philosophical ideas with friends or acquaintances, you’ve likely encountered dismissive responses.

Plato’s just wrong,” someone might declare, or “Kant’s ideas are too abstract for me to take seriously.”

These statements, delivered with casual confidence, might leave you wondering: how is it that individuals with minimal exposure to philosophical thought can so easily dismiss ideas that have taken lifetimes to refine?

Why do we so often assume that our cursory understanding outweighs the insights of those who devoted their lives to exploring the human condition?

This phenomenon something profound about our attitudes toward complexity, expertise, and self-awareness.

In truth, it might even reflect aspects of ourselves that we hesitate to admit.

The Comfort of Simplified Skepticism

Imagine a time when someone explained a challenging philosophical concept to you.

Perhaps it was Nietzsche’s idea of the Übermensch or Descartes’ radical skepticism.

Did you feel a reflexive urge to question it, or even dismiss it outright?

If so, you’re far from alone. This response stems from two common tendencies:

A Perceived Lack of Relevance

In an era driven by results and productivity, philosophy’s abstract nature can seem out of place.

“How does this help me pay my bills or get a promotion?” someone might ask.

Without immediate, practical application, philosophical exploration is often dismissed as intellectual indulgence.

Overconfidence in Personal Reasoning

Modern culture places immense value on individual opinion. The mantra “everyone’s entitled to their own perspective” can lead to an inflated sense of confidence in one’s own reasoning.

It’s easier to trust your instincts than to grapple with centuries of rigorous thought.

Unfortunately, this approach often reduces critical engagement to superficial judgments.

    The Misunderstood Purpose of Philosophy

    Philosophy doesn’t aim to provide definitive answers but rather to deepen our questions and expand our understanding.

    Great thinkers like Plato and Aristotle didn’t agree on everything; their disagreements were the foundation for richer intellectual exploration.

    To understand why philosophy often clashes with popular assumptions, consider the following contrasts:

    PhilosophyPopular Assumptions
    Encourages complex, open-ended questionsPrefers simple, definitive answers
    Requires deep critical engagementRelies on surface-level judgments
    Accepts ambiguity and uncertaintySeeks clarity and absolutes

    The Role of Ego and Fear

    The tendency to dismiss philosophy often stems from fear.

    Engaging with profound ideas challenges the comfort of certainty.

    As The Killers’ lyric puts it:

    “And sometimes I get nervous, when I see an open door…”

    This open door is a metaphor for uncertainty—a core element of philosophical inquiry.

    To explore it requires humility and courage, qualities that the ego resists. It’s far easier to reject a concept outright than to admit a lack of understanding.

    A cinematic parallel to this struggle can be found in the movie Inception. Cobb’s explanation of shared dreaming divides characters into two camps: those open to the idea and those dismissive of its plausibility.

    Similarly, philosophy demands that we suspend our disbelief and explore ideas that initially seem foreign, complex, or even absurd.

    From STEM Supremacy to Dunning-Kruger

    Anti-intellectualism plays a significant role in why people often dismiss philosophy without truly engaging with it.

    Anti-intellectual movements tend to target the liberal arts, with philosophy bearing a significant share of the brunt—though perhaps not as severely as fields like sociology.

    This sentiment is further fueled by a specific subset of anti-intellectualism rooted in “STEM supremacy”.

    Many hold the view that science alone offers the “true” path to knowledge.

    The widespread tendency to form and assert opinions without doing the intellectual work to justify them fuels this movement.

    One of the greatest lessons a philosophy education imparts is the humility to recognize one’s own limits and resist the urge to speak authoritatively on topics outside one’s expertise—a skill many people fail to develop.

    Relatedly, the Dunning-Kruger Effect* often rears its head, with those possessing only superficial exposure to philosophical ideas mistakenly believing themselves to be experts.

    Philosophy, in particular, seems vulnerable to this phenomenon due to the misconception that it simply involves idle contemplation rather than rigorous intellectual effort.

    Together, these factors create an environment where philosophy is too easily dismissed by those who underestimate its depth and significance.

    *The Dunning-Kruger Effect is a cognitive bias where people with low knowledge or skill in a subject overestimate their competence because they lack the awareness to recognize their own limitations.

    Lessons from the Great Thinkers

    The habit of assuming that one’s intellect surpasses that of philosophers isn’t necessarily born of arrogance—it’s often rooted in misunderstanding.

    Philosophy isn’t about proving who’s “right” or “wrong”; it’s a centuries-long dialogue that invites us to explore life’s most enduring questions.

    Take Nietzsche as an example. His famous statement, “God is dead,” is often misinterpreted as a blunt rejection of religion.

    In reality, it was a commentary on the collapse of shared moral frameworks in the modern world.

    To dismiss Nietzsche’s ideas as simplistic or irrelevant is to miss the profound cultural critique he offered.

    Similarly, Kant’s complex theories about perception and reality might seem obtuse, but they illuminate the limitations of human cognition.

    His work isn’t about delivering concrete answers but about expanding how we think about the relationship between our minds and the external world.

    My Journey Through Skepticism

    I’ll admit: I wasn’t always an advocate for philosophy. As a young adult, I dismissed thinkers like Kant and Nietzsche as overly complicated and impractical.

    When asked to present a philosopher I disagreed with during a college assignment, I chose Nietzsche. I expected to confirm my negative biases, but the opposite happened.

    Reading Nietzsche’s work forced me to confront my assumptions.

    His writings challenged me to think about the human capacity for growth and self-determination. I realized his critique wasn’t about promoting arrogance but about rejecting complacency.

    In engaging deeply with his ideas, I learned the value of approaching unfamiliar concepts with humility.

    A Call to Intellectual Courage

    If there’s one takeaway from this post, it’s this: engaging with challenging ideas is a path to growth.

    Skepticism is healthy, but dismissiveness is a disservice to both the thinker and yourself.

    Acknowledging your limitations isn’t a weakness; it’s the starting point for genuine understanding.

    The next time someone introduces a philosophical idea you don’t understand or initially disagree with, resist the temptation to dismiss it.

    Instead, lean into the discomfort, ask questions, and seek deeper insights. You might find that even the most abstract concepts have something to teach you about yourself and the world.

    Philosophy isn’t reserved for academics or intellectual elites—it’s for anyone willing to confront life’s uncertainties with curiosity and courage. Let me leave you with the words of Plutarch:

    “The mind is not a vessel to be filled, but a fire to be kindled.”

    So kindle that fire. Engage with ideas, embrace complexity, and discover the transformative power of philosophy. You might be surprised by what you find.

    Comments

    Leave a Reply