Philosophy to me is the general knowledge of all the disciplines known. There has to be a starting place to introduce the beginning of anything, that will bring us knowledge and philosophy. The the general description of the first knowledge is broken down into sub units like psychology and anthropology and the like. But philosophy seems to have a human point of view without esortoric knowledge.
There are mysteries in and of all disciplines and knowledge. One has to start somewhere and it seems philosophy is it. Philosophy is like the infinite universe and is filled with mysteries to be discovered. But after a while studying can be tendious and questions evolve more and more. I wonder if our questions deter us from the original thought we had leading us to invalid questions?
Be it science or whatever. Where does knowledge begin, with our interest and curiosity. If knowledge is the building blocks of the future would'nt it be more practical to learn how to structure the original question to be understood without questions first? Does our opinion cause us to invalidate our methods of inquiry in the first place?
Would'nt it be better to pose several words as tags or pointers to help us design a better way to discover valid facts from invalid facts within the question? For instants, how does the knowledge of Quatum mechanics teach us more or less of what we need to know science wise? What about the humanity aspect of finding the answers to curing all diseases, pollution,wars, instead of asking what is quatum mechanics?
Do these questions lead us toward a answer or away from them? Paul