4. The Philosopher as Lover of Wisdom: Definition and Equivocation

Subscribe in Podcast App | Download Transcript

Lecture Notes

Main Topics #

The Original Definition of Philosopher #

• Philosopher (φιλόσοφος): literally, a lover of wisdom (φιλός + σοφία)
• In the original and true sense, the philosopher pursues wisdom for its own sake
• This definition requires examining: (1) what wisdom is; (2) how the philosopher must love wisdom; and (3) equivocal uses of the term

The Problem of Equivocal Use of “Philosopher” #

Berquist identifies how modern thinkers have corrupted the term by pursuing ends other than wisdom:

• Francis Bacon: Emphasizes “knowledge is power”—a lover of power, not wisdom
• Adam Smith: Focuses on “the wealth of nations”—a lover of wealth
• Hegel: Makes “freedom and liberty” the end of history—a lover of freedom
• Jean-Paul Sartre: Prioritizes absolute freedom and the free will—a lover of freedom/license, not wisdom
• Nietzsche: Rejects reason itself—fundamentally cannot be a lover of wisdom

The central problem: When one calls such men “philosophers” while they pursue other goods, one uses the term equivocally—meaning different things in different cases.

The Necessary Connection: Wisdom, Reason, and Order #

Fundamental principle: Wisdom is the highest perfection of reason.

Logical implications:

• If I love wisdom, I must love reason (since wisdom is reason’s highest perfection)
• If I don’t love reason, I cannot love wisdom
• One cannot love wisdom without loving order (since reason orders things)
• This is analogous to: one cannot love health without loving the body; one cannot love the eyes without loving 20-20 vision

Application to Nietzsche: How can Nietzsche be called a lover of wisdom when he explicitly rejects reason? This is a fundamental contradiction.

Thomas Aquinas on Wisdom and Order #

From Thomas’s commentary on Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics:

• “It belongs to wise men to order things”
• The reason: wisdom is the highest perfection of reason, and it belongs to reason to order
• Therefore, the philosopher—seeking the highest perfection of reason—must urge people to use reason

Greek Philosophers and Divine Wisdom #

The Greek position: Aristotle and other Greek philosophers held that:

• Either God alone is wise, OR
• If a human is wise, it is only by participating in God’s wisdom

Key distinction between Greek and modern philosophers:

• Greek philosophers: Never exposed to revelation through the prophets or Christ; they did not reject what they never encountered
• Modern philosophers: Writing after Christ, they have access to revelation but deliberately reject it
• By rejecting the wisdom of God, modern philosophers lose even the wisdom of man (as shown in the inversion: Feuerbach, Hegel, and Marx transformed the Incarnation—“God became man”—into pride: “Man is God”)

The Natural Beginnings of Philosophical Inquiry #

Berquist references two natural beginnings:

1. Wonder (θαῦμα): The natural desire to know for its own sake; to know the cause
2. The desire to live well: The natural desire for εὖ ζῆν (well-being), not merely to live

Key Arguments #

Argument 1: The Necessity of Loving Reason to Love Wisdom #

1. Wisdom is the highest perfection of reason
2. To love something is to love its perfections
3. Therefore, to love wisdom necessarily entails loving reason
4. Conclusion: One cannot be a true philosopher (lover of wisdom) while rejecting reason

Application: Nietzsche’s irrationalism is incompatible with philosophy properly understood.

Argument 2: Equivocation and the Misuse of “Philosopher” #

1. A word is used equivocally when it signifies different things in different cases
2. Modern thinkers use “philosophy” to name the pursuit of power, wealth, or freedom
3. But the original meaning of “philosopher” is lover of wisdom
4. Conclusion: Either these moderns are not philosophers in the true sense, or the term is being used equivocally

Argument 3: Why Modern Philosophy Cannot Preserve Even Natural Wisdom #

1. The Greek philosophers learned from God by imitation of natural things (imitatio naturae)
2. They did not reject revelation because they were never exposed to it
3. Modern philosophers, after Christ, reject divine revelation
4. By rejecting the wisdom of God, they lose the foundation for natural philosophy itself
5. Conclusion: Modern philosophers seeking to return to Greek rationalism while rejecting Christianity are in a worse position than the Greeks

Important Definitions #

• Philosopher (φιλόσοφος): One who loves wisdom (σοφία) for its own sake
• Wisdom (σοφία): Knowledge of the first causes; the highest perfection of reason
• Equivocal use: Using one word to signify fundamentally different things, such that the single term conceals rather than clarifies
• Wonder (θαῦμα): The natural desire to know, especially to know the cause of things
• Imitatio naturae: Learning from natural things, which is the first way man learns from God

Examples & Illustrations #

Bacon and Knowledge as Power #

• Bacon emphasizes that “knowledge is power”
• This reveals that Bacon loves power, and seeks knowledge only as a means to power
• He is not a lover of wisdom (love of wisdom for its own sake) but a lover of power

Nietzsche’s Irrationalism #

• Every student paper on Nietzsche reveals he is fundamentally irrational
• Berquist’s challenge: How can one love wisdom without loving reason? How can one love reason and not love wisdom?
• Nietzsche fails the basic test of philosophy

The Hippocratic Oath #

• Invented by a Greek pagan (not Christian or Jewish)
• Opposed both abortion and euthanasia
• Demonstrates that natural reason—without revelation—can know certain moral truths
• Shows the validity of Greek natural philosophy independent of Christian revelation

Plato as Example of True Philosophy #

• Quoted from Plutarch’s Life of Pericles: Plato was “the first man to show both by word and deed that the happy life is a virtuous life”
• Unlike lesser philosophers who taught by words alone or lived virtuously without explanation, Plato unified word and deed
• He demonstrates philosophy’s integration of reason and life

Lenin as False Prophet #

• Modern biographies reveal Lenin was called “The Great Prophet and Apostle”
• This is a parody of how apostles were called prophets and apostles in the true sense
• Shows how modern ideologies pervert religious and philosophical language for their own ends

Notable Quotes #

“If I love wisdom, I must love reason. If I really love reason, maybe I have to love wisdom. It’s the highest or the greatest perfection.”

“How can you be a lover of wisdom and not be a lover of reason? Because wisdom is the highest or the greatest perfection. If I don’t love reason, I can’t be a lover of wisdom.”

“Thomas, in his training to Nicomachean Ethics, he recalls this idea that it belongs to wise men to order things, right? And then he says the reason for that is that wisdom is the highest perfection of reason and it belongs to reason and the order.”

“The Greeks were not really faced with that, right? Because they weren’t exposed, right, to the word of God, right? Through the prophets, sorry, not through Christ’s apostles, right?”

“The modern philosophers, they’re writing after Christ. It’s not right. So, they reject this. They lack something they should have. So, they they tried to find a substitute for philosophy, right?”

“Aristotle died in, what, 322 B.C., right? More than 300 years before Christ.”

Questions Addressed #

Q: What is a philosopher in the original sense? #

A: A lover of wisdom (φιλόσοφος) who pursues wisdom for its own sake, not as a means to other ends like power, wealth, honor, or freedom.

Q: Why are modern thinkers like Bacon, Smith, Hegel, Sartre, and Nietzsche not true philosophers? #

A: Because they pursue other primary goods (power, wealth, freedom) or reject reason itself, rather than wisdom. Since wisdom is the highest perfection of reason, one cannot love wisdom without loving reason. These thinkers use the word “philosophy” equivocally—meaning something entirely different from the original sense.

Q: How can the Greek philosophers be excused for lacking knowledge of Christian revelation? #

A: They were never exposed to revelation through the prophets or Christ and therefore did not reject it. Modern philosophers, by contrast, have access to divine wisdom through Christ but deliberately reject it, making them culpable in a way the Greeks were not.

Q: What is the relationship between wisdom, reason, and order? #

A: Wisdom is the highest perfection of reason. Reason’s characteristic function is to order things. Therefore, to love wisdom is necessarily to love both reason and order. One cannot separate these loves.