Why is philosophy seen as an abstract discipline?
The vision in which an individual has a perspective of philosophy as an abstract discipline is something that is not possibly due to a single factor, one of the causes is that philosophy for example tries to give an answer to issues that cannot be demonstrable within science, since science can demonstrate a phenomenon based on observable and measurable characteristics.
In previous posts I have already talked about existence, which is a very complex subject to explain, and that within science there would be no place to explain it, since it could not be demonstrated, that means that philosophy allows to deal with subjects that are explained under an individual approach, that is to say under the philosophy that each individual has, that is to say under what each person thinks with arguments based on an abstract logic.
It does not mean that within science there are no abstract topics, but being able to be demonstrable they end up being less abstract than those that philosophy can deal with in its character of individual logical thinking.
The language or lexicon used in philosophy also distances people from its comprehension, terms such as ontology, epistemology or metaphysics, for example, end up being complex and distance people from a possible applicability of philosophy in their daily life.
Perhaps the beauty of philosophy is what at the same time distances people from it, I at least think that philosophy in its character of freedom is not like science, that is to say it does not follow a methodology of unification to be able to demonstrate, but philosophy is lacking a unique method to investigate and provide solution, since there is philosophy according to Plato, philosophy according to Aristotle, philosophy according to Pythagoras, philosophy according to Descartes, that is to say a unique philosophy based on criteria of each person who can sow a postulate according to his thoughts. This makes it to be seen as a subjective discipline and without rigor, which alienates some people, in particular to me instead of alienating me, it brings me closer because I think I can have the opportunity to think about some aspects that only have a place in the free of philosophy.
The applicability that philosophy can have in our daily life has nothing to do with its abstract characteristic, since abstract is not synonymous of uselessness, therefore the fact that philosophy is abstract does not mean that it is useless, on the contrary it has a utility that can challenge the limits of human knowledge.
From my perspective, the greatest utility I find in philosophy is that intrinsic characteristic of questioning, although we cannot prove something, we can question and ask ourselves things, for example: Where do I come from? Why do I exist? Why do I exist? What are the frontiers of the unimaginable?
In this way, we can ask ourselves many questions that may not have a logical demonstration in science, but in philosophy, at least it has a link to debate and share ideas.
Philosophy is seen as abstract because it deals with fundamental questions and uses specialized language. However, this abstraction does not make it any less important or relevant. On the contrary, philosophy provides us with valuable tools for understanding the world and ourselves.
The abstractness of philosophy can at the same time become the simplicity of philosophy itself, the abstractness of philosophy can be overcome simply by being able to go deeper into it, to the point where we end up becoming familiar with its technical language and finding applications to our daily lives.