What is Your Least Favorite Branch of Philosophy?

When we ponder the vast landscape of philosophical inquiry, certain branches seem to stand out as less intellectually satisfying or more controversial than others. In this article, we delve into the reasons why three specific branches of philosophy often face criticism: metaphysics, cosmology, and epistemology. We will also explore the least favorite branch, which many philosophers seem to believe is the philosophy of religion.

1. Metaphysics: The Least Favorite of All?

Metaphysics, the branch of philosophy that deals with the nature of reality, often faces criticism due to its reliance on untestable assertions about testable objects. Cosmology, the study of the universe, similarly bases itself on untestable assertions about testable objects. Ontology, which deals with the nature of being and existence, also draws criticism for circular definitions and repetitive cycles. These issues have led some philosophers to conclude that these fields are more theoretical and less practical.

2. Epistemology: A Satisfying but Controversial Field

Epistemology, the branch concerned with the theory of knowledge, is often considered less intellectually satisfying. As an undergraduate, I could never fully take epistemology seriously, as it appeared to be a "nest and brood of dualisms," according to John Dewey. This branch delves into the nature of knowledge, belief, and justification, but its reliance on a priori knowledge and circular reasoning has often been seen as less compelling.

3. Philosophy of Religion: The Absolute Least Favorite

The philosophy of religion is arguably the least favorite branch of philosophy, according to numerous philosophers and scholars. While it is not least favorite, it is the least intellectually satisfying for many. The philosophy of religion frequently relies on circular reasoning and appeals to divine authority, making it seem less rigorous and more dogmatic compared to other branches.

2a. The Ontological Argument

Take, for instance, Anselm of Canterbury's Ontological Argument, a classic example in the philosophy of religion. This argument begins with an a priori knowledge that is taken as a fundamental theory about the organization of the universe. If this organizational structure is true, the argument will provide reasons why God must exist. However, the circular nature of this argument often leaves many questioning its validity.

2b. The Problem of Evil

The Problem of Evil, particularly the argument known as "PoE," poses a significant challenge to the concept of an omnibenevolent, omniscient, and omnipotent God. If God is all-loving and all-powerful, why do evil and suffering exist? This problem has puzzled philosophers for centuries and continues to be a sore point in the philosophy of religion. As Sam Qwatos rightly asks, "If the God most of us know is all-loving and all-caring, why do such horrible things happen to good people?"

In addition to these specific concerns, the philosophy of religion often involves arguments that rely heavily on anecdotal evidence and personal beliefs rather than empirical or logical reasoning. Many scholars argue that this makes the field less scientifically rigorous and more open to subjective interpretation.

In conclusion, while each branch of philosophy has its unique challenges and contributions, the philosophy of religion often faces the most criticism, particularly due to its reliance on circular reasoning, appeal to divine authority, and the problem of evil. However, it is important to recognize that this critique does not diminish the depth of inquiry and meaningful debates that this branch of philosophy continues to offer.

Keywords: philosophy, metaphysics, epistemology, philosophy of religion