The psychology of philosophy demolishes many myths of human character: the actions, reactions, choices, justifications, judgments, behaviour, and prejudices. It is obvious that philosophy deconstructing human nature will attract criticism, denial, and outright vilification.
The philosopher’s choice of words constructs a credible narrative from deep observation and introspection (necessary to erase any doubt and biased perspective) that can shape the work into some delusional critical piece.
Many readers still view philosophy as an individual’s idle rumination to criticise human nature (it is one of the most common perspectives to denounce philosophical work.). Being unfamiliar with philosophical and psychoanalytical ideologies and theories can voice incisive criticisms.
One has to acknowledge this fact that any philosophical work observes a broad spectrum of human behaviour that is prevalent or is influenced by the changing social dynamics. The ecosystem of human society necessitates certain behaviour which may be unjustified and require corrective measures.
Resistance to change and being deliberately oblivious to the philosophy of good and bad is an impediment. To obtain a credible solution to identify the philosophy of both requires meticulous analysis of human psychology. Before denouncing any philosophy, it is advisable to gather enough education on the prevailing social stirrings, conflicts, and historical consequences.
Everyone seeks clarity, but it is impossible when there are denials and lack accountability. One has to learn, unlearn, and relearn the modern philosophies that emerge from changes in society. Lack of cognition and the urge to ask relevant questions obscures learning of contemporary concepts of life.
Criticism is necessary, but that should be informed and legitimate. Hiding behind anonymity gives an individual the power to disassociate from reality, as one can unleash a tirade against anyone or anything that is being discussed on the internet and social media (known as trolls). How can anyone achieve clarity when the mind is distracted by many such identities?
Being anonymous is a peculiar thing sometimes, especially for writers. There can be several reasons to disengage the real identity from a piece of writing(s). It does offer more freedom to discuss perceived ideas to be controversial that can rake up protests and even severe retaliation.
It is quite a crucial moment when a writer wants to dissociate the true identity from the narratives. It also allows diversification of characters in a proper sense, creating situations where the writer is able to get into various characters to boldly deliver the speeches that can stir favourable and unfavourable comments. Offer a counter-narrative that is logical, informed, based on careful observations.
Moreover, selective outrage against any literature of philosophy is triggered due to biased interpretations. The most important aspect of reading is interpreting correctly or at least deriving a conclusion with a liberal mindset. It is impossible to comprehend all writing from one conveniently chosen perspective.
Just wishing change is not enough; one has to study life and learn from experiences and try to expand the mind to reflect on many other uncomfortable facets of human nature. Neglecting the aberrations lead to further complications and it becomes difficult dealing with such widespread hostile situations.