In this paper I have been asked to distinguish between what it means for a person to have or to say what their personal philosophy may be and how it may inform their beliefs and attitudes towards the world and others and how that relates to the actual meaning of the word in its truest definition. My belief is that most people mistake their beliefs and the influences as being their philosophy when in fact this would be closer to their ideology than any particular philosophy they may or may not have. Ideology refers a person or groups set of beliefs, guidelines which dictate how they respond and behave in every situation, according to the accepted rules of that particular group. Philosophy refers to looking at life in a pragmatic manner and attempting to understand why life is as it is and the principles governing behind it.

   My personal philosophy is that we are all cosmically connected and the smallest effects can have the biggest consequences. Unlike Kant, I believe that the mind is without limited and can provide us with experiences independent of our senses. I don’t need to touch a tree’s bark to know that it has a rough surface. I can look at a cake or a slice of pizza and almost taste it if I think about it long enough without having to experience actual going to a bakery or pizza parlor. Kant believed that all our possible experience must conform to these SAPs. The SAPs include location in space and time, causality experiencing self, thingness, identity, and various mathematical notions  I believe the opposite. When I look out my window at the tree in my front yard, I know that it is more than just a collection of shades and shadows “justified true belief.” I would have to say that my personal philosophy would be close to that of a rationalist the view that regards reason as the chief source and test of knowledge. Holding that reality itself has an inherently logical structure. I disagree with the Empiricist philosophy David Hume, that no sensation supports the notion of necessary connection between cause and effect. I believe in cause and effect. My example would be the affect a full moon has on the tides in the oceans. Things happen for a reason and there is always a reason why things happen the way that they do. Rather we experience it or even know about it doesn’t negate the fact that it happened.

When a tree falls in the woods, I believe it makes a sound rather anyone is there to hear the sound or not. I also disagree with his notion that there is no immediate intellectual intuition of self. The concept of “self” is not supported by sensations.  In contrast with Descartes, “I think therefore I am.” Hume believed that we don’t really exist in the way that we believe that we do at all. He believed that we were nothing more than a collection of senses coming together to give us the illusion that we exist. To this I say rather the world around us exits or rather we are just brains in a vat we are having an experience it may not be a true experience but an experience non the same. It’s like being on one of those simulation rides at Disney. You get on and they strap you in then the ride begins. And although you are not moving in any real way your experience is the same as if you were. Our minds are limitless, like in the movies the Matrix, and Inception, or even the Disney ride rather we are just a brain in a jar or strapped into a seat at Disney if our mind interprets the experience as being real for all intense and purposes the experience is real.