People sometimes ask me: Is Deep Philosophy a kind of philosophical practice?

My answer is: No. Both of them have a similar starting point, but from there they go in opposite directions.

Let me start with the similarity: Philosophical practice and Deep Philosophy start from the vision that philosophy can contribute to everyday life. As a result, they both face the same challenge: How can philosophy, which is so abstract and general, connect to the concerns of the person in the street, which are so concrete and specific?

In philosophy we ask: “What is the definition of love?” but Arthur the taxi-driver asks: “Why is my wife angry with me?” In philosophy we ask: “What does freedom mean?” but Mary the cook asks: “How can I get a few days of vacation?” In philosophy we ask: “How do I know that the world exists?” but Sam asks: “Does my neighbor know that I broke his window?”

Evidently, there is a big gap between the generality and abstraction of philosophy on the one hand, and the concreteness and specificity of everyday life. Both Philosophical Practice and Deep Philosophy encounter this big gap, and both of them believe that the gap can be bridged.

But here the similarity ends. From here on, they go in opposite directions. This is, I think, the essence of the difference: WHILE PHILOSOPHICAL PRACTICE TRIES TO “LOWER” PHILOSOPHY TO THE LEVEL OF EVERYDAY LIFE, DEEP PHILOSOPHY TRIES TO “ELEVATE” LIFE TO THE LEVEL OF PHILOSOPHY. In other words, while philosophical practice tries to translate philosophy to concrete personal issues, Deep Philosophy wants give philosophy a higher (or deeper) dimension.

This basic difference is the result of different motivations. Philosophical practitioners want to work with the personal concerns which individuals have. The problem for them is that this is not what traditional philosophers do. Throughout history, philosophers have always constructed theories (or networks of ideas) about general issues of life and reality. Therefore, philosophical practitioners cannot use philosophy for their purpose – they are forced to change philosophy to something else: they translate philosophical issues to personal issues; they teach a thinking-tool from philosophy but forget the universal issues that it investigates; they copy philosophy’s freedom from assumptions, but they apply it to personal assumptions; and so on. The result is that philosophical practice is not philosophy. It may have philosophical elements, it may be inspired by philosophy, but its discourse is not a philosophical discourse. Talking with Arthur about his problem with his wife, or with Mary about her problems at work – this is certainly not a philosophical discussion.

In contrast, Deep Philosophers go in the opposite direction: They are in love with philosophy and don’t want to change it to something else. Philosophy inspires and awakens them, and it makes their life deeper and more meaningful. For them philosophy is precious and powerful, and they don’t want to lower it, or to translate it to something else. Their goal is to use the power of philosophy to elevate life – their own lives and the lives of others.

The result is that Deep Philosophy is a philosophy that doesn’t deal with personal issues, while philosophical practice is a discourse about personal issues that is not philosophy. This means that their target audience is different: Philosophical practice is for people who want to deal with personal concerns, while Deep Philosophy is for people who want to enrich and deepen their lives. The first is for people who want to return to normal life, while the second is for seekers – people who are not satisfied with “normal” life, but want to grow beyond it to a higher level.