# The summarized abstraction of philosophy

This is a series of questions you can ask yourself to discover what your philosophy is.

- It's almost guaranteed that each person will build their own unique set of values, even if they ascribe to one philosopher.
- Differences are common, typical, and likely derived from [our personalities](people-personality.md).

The attempt here is to give philosophical understanding, but without having to read philosophy.

## Metaphysics

## Axiology - where we get values

Do abstract objects, like numbers and forms, exist independently of the physical world?

- If yes, then you believe Platonism.
- If no, you believe nominalism, and that the abstract objects are simply our names or labels, but they don't have any independent reality.

Aesthetics are things we define as good, beautiful, true, or their absence. Are these aesthetic values completely subjective, or is there an objective reality to them?

- Believing in any religion will likely mean "yes", though it can vary on how much it is objective.
- Fully subjective values are difficult to qualify in light of [human universals](humanity-universals.md).

### Epistemology - where knowledge comes from

We all know knowledge can be "a posteriori", meaning "after the thing". But, can we know things without having any experience before we observed it ("a priori")?

- Believing in any religion will likely mean "yes".
- Immanuel Kant asserted we can as a form of universal truths we all understand.

Can we justify what we know solely from what we internally know, or do we need external validation to be sure we are correct?

- Internalists assert that a thought can be proven without any outward evidence.
- Externalists assert that at least some outward evidence is necessary to prove something.

### Logic - how we reason and conclude

Is there any difference between analytic propositions (things that are true in their meaning alone) and synthetic propositions (things that are true depending on how they relate to the world)?

- If not true, then every single logical thought we have is only based on how we relate it to the world.
- If true, we can create self-sufficient statements that don't need nature to validate it (e.g., "all ducks are birds").
- In a sense, this is an expansion of the Platonism question above.