{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.021256931608133085, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 4.640625, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Moods and the Meaning of Philosophy

Following Heidegger, I argue that our understanding is always attuned in some way, and our attunement always contains an understanding. Every philosophical investigation will therefore be carried out within or be subject to a certain mood, even if the philosopher may not be aware of this. Is there a particularly prevalent mood in contemporary philosophy? I argue that it is in fact boredom. An airport becomes a place of boredom when it fails to provide you with what you want from it: the opportunity to enter an airplane and leave it. Along similar lines, a philosophical text becomes boring when it fails to provide you with what you need from it. It lacks a purpose. What Kant described as “pedantry,” a self-contained and formalist style of writing, has become the norm in academic philosophy. In order to truly matter, philosophy must maintain its relation to the pre- and postphilosophical, to its origin in problems that have an emotional impact on us and to its possibilities for transforming our lives. Such a philosophy is possible.