Article
What is Philosophy? What Did I Actually Study and Why?
What is philosophy? After studying it, my answer stays surprisingly simple: it is the love of wisdom, exactly as the original Greek word suggests. In practice it is the patient, rational pursuit of understanding the world, the human being, and the relationship between them.
I will never forget my grandmother’s reaction when I told her I was pursuing philosophy for my master’s degree. She was bewildered, even disappointed. To her, philosophy seemed impractical, pointless. But to me, it made perfect sense. In an ever-changing world where fields of study rise and fall, philosophy stood out to me as something that had endured through the ages. It offered a timeless perspective.
When choosing a field that has stood the test of time, the options narrow: mathematics, physics, and philosophy. I’ve always admired certain aspects of mathematics and physics, concepts like the weak law of large numbers or the law of conservation of energy can profoundly shift one’s worldview. Yet, what transformed my perspective on life the most were certain branches of philosophy, distilled into the best philosophy books I have read.
What is philosophy, really?
The first lesson of philosophy is its own complexity. After thousands of years, humanity has yet to agree on its exact definition or boundaries. Is it the broad, rational exploration of the world, humanity, and their relationship, as seen in antiquity? Or is it the meticulous, language-focused analysis characteristic of 20th-century philosophy? For the sake of readability, I’ll simplify: philosophy is the love of wisdom.
The question of what philosophy is might be an excellent starting point for a newcomer to the field. However, I’ve reached a point where debating its definition feels less important. Philosophy, derived from Greek, translates to “love of wisdom.” Perhaps that’s the only definition it truly needs.
The journey of philosophy begins with an emotion
So, why study something with such ambiguous boundaries? Why devote myself to a discipline even its practitioners can’t define? The answer lies in curiosity, a curiosity sparked by reading works like Gorgias (Γοργίας) and The Defence of Socrates (Ἀπολογία Σωκράτους). If those texts awaken something in you, as they did in me, there’s no turning back. The opinions of others fade in the face of a lifelong pursuit of understanding, the pursuit that I have come to see as the meaning of life itself. For me, that pursuit led most deeply into phenomenology, the branch of philosophy I went on to study for years.
Summary
Common questions on this article's topic
What is philosophy?
What are the main branches of philosophy?
What is the Socratic method?
Is philosophy practical or purely academic?
Why has philosophy endured for thousands of years?
Why study philosophy?
If you have any thoughts, questions, or feedback, feel free to drop me a message at mail@richardgolian.com.
LinkedIn
Related articles
If I have learned anything from this experience, it is that my life is not driven by something predefined.
Is it better to doubt or to act with determination?
I ask: “Why?” Mom answers, and I ask again: “Why?” Mommy answers: “Because it is so.”
More articles
A few weeks ago I installed a small local AI model on my laptop that watches a live camera feed. I turned the webcam on in the dark, and in near total darkness it recognised me and the objects in the room. That such things exist, I have known for a long time. What opened my eyes was the accessibility. I installed it in one prompt, free, and it runs entirely on my machine, sending data nowhere.
I have Heidegger and my notebook beside me. I am asking where all of this is heading, where artificial intelligence is taking us.
Seventy per cent. That is where the first AI output begins, even when you give it the full company context and the best examples from the past. We are talking about the kind of output that cannot be defined programmatically. It is more complex. Often it is creative work. On one repeated type of output I reached eighty per cent within a week. Every further percentage point is harder than the one before.
For a long time we treated the internet as the main road. The place where work and relationships happen. Yet most of what we see on it today is, or soon will be, AI-generated: text, images, profiles and comments. The internet is turning into an online game full of bots, where you cannot be sure that a human is on the other side of anything. So I ask: was the online world the main road, or only a temporary detour that part of us will return from, back offline?
A few days ago I interviewed a senior marketer. An experienced man, years of practice. I asked him about AI. He said he barely uses it. He had one bad experience with the output and decided he was too senior for it to add value when it is not perfect. I know the other side too: professionals who automate everything that can be automated.
Europe does not have the capacity to face a full-scale, mass drone war of the kind we see in Ukraine. Three dependencies weaken it: China supplies the physical material for defence systems, the United States supplies capabilities Europe does not have, and twenty-seven states cannot agree how fast, or who pays. Rearmament plans exist, but they are being carried out slowly.
AI produces the graphic, the newsletter and the product page faster than a person. What is left for the one who used to do it is the judgement, knowing whether the output is good. But most people have worse judgement than AI. And whoever cannot judge quality cannot delegate either. How do you tell whether yours is the judgement a company relies on, or the kind it can replace?
In April, in the first part of this series, I wrote about an AI prediction system I had started building on my own machine. At the time the software was a few hours old and the prediction record was empty. The record since then has shown one thing: the system does not yet understand the market it is being asked to forecast. It can pull macro context, book value, earnings. But it cannot put those together into something that helps it understand the price.
Prague, 13 May 2026. On my way to work I started thinking about something that stayed with me for days. If most routine work on a computer disappears in the next ten years, and a large share of repetitive manual work disappears with it, what happens to the flow of money? Who pays whom for what? Which economic layers will exist, how large will they be, and what relationships will run between them? This is the six-layer map I sketched as an answer.
I am building an AI system to predict the S&P 500. It runs on my own machine, uses free public data (yfinance, FRED, the Shiller dataset), and grades every forecast against reality. This series documents the build itself: the decisions, the methodology, the mistakes. What I will eventually share from the running system is a separate question, and an honest one.
Four days in Catalonia. No computer, no AI, almost no social media. I bought this notebook so that I could write down what I would think about, and what I would come across and learn on the trip.