Philosophy has almost as many definitions as there have been philosophers, both as a subject matter and an activity, and no simple definition can do it justice. The issue of the definition of philosophy is thus a controversial subject that is nowadays tackled by Metaphilosophy (or the philosophy of philosophy). The word is derived from the ancient Greek words philo-, to love or to befriend, and -sophia, wisdom. Modern usage of the term is much broader; the concept of philosophy encompasses all of knowledge and all that can be known, including the means by which such knowledge can be acquired. However, in the contemporary English-speaking academic world, the term is often used implicitly to refer to analytic philosophy and, in non-English speaking countries, it often refers implicitly to a different, European strain, continental philosophy.
Philosophy ponders the most fundamental questions humankind has been able to ask. These are increasingly numerous and over time they have been arranged into the overlapping branches of the philosophy tree:
Logic: What makes a good argument? How can I think critically about complicated arguments? What makes for good thinking? When can I say that something just does not make sense? Where is the origin of logic?
Epistemology: What are the nature and limits of knowledge? What is more fundamental to human existence, knowing (epistemology) or being (ontology)? How do we come to know what we know? What are the limits and scope of knowledge? How can we know that there are other minds (if we can)? How can we know that there is an external world (if we can)? How can we prove our answers? What is a true statement?
Metaphysics: What sorts of things exist? What is the nature of those things? Do some things exist independently of our perception? What is the nature of space and time? What is the relationship of the mind to the body? What is it to be a person? What is it to be conscious? Does God exist?
Ethics: Is there a difference between ethically right and wrong actions (or values, or institutions)? If so, what is that difference? Which actions are right, and which wrong? Do divine commands make right acts right, or is their rightness based on something else? Are there standards of rightness that are absolute, or are all such standards relative to particular cultures? How should I live? What is happiness?
Aesthetics: What is art? What is beauty? Is there a standard of taste? Is art meaningful? If so, what does it mean? What is good art? Is art for the purpose of an end, or is "art for art's sake?" What connects us to art? How does art affect us? Is some art unethical? Can art corrupt or elevate societies?
Philosophy of Language: How are sentences composed into a meaningful whole, and what are the meanings of the parts of sentences? What is the nature of meaning? (What exactly is a meaning?) What do we do with language? How do we use it socially? (What is the purpose of language?) How does language relate to the mind, both of the speaker and the interpreter? How does language relate to the world? (Courtesy of the Philosophy of Language wikipedia page)
Political philosophy: Are political institutions and their exercise of power justified? What is justice? Is there a 'proper' role and scope of government? Is democracy the best form of governance? Is governance ethically justifiable? Should a state be allowed? Should a state be able to promote the norms and values of a certain moral or religious doctrine? Are states allowed to go to war? Do states have duties against inhabitants of other states?
German Idealism and almost all the articles related to it need to be either rewritten or expanded, because a wikipedia user called Lestrade has, among other things, taken it upon himself to imbue each page with bias in favour of Schopenhauer, who he attempts to present as having the last say in everything. This is a terrible thing to do, because German Idealism is such an important period in philosophy, whose influence is still strongly felt today.
Protected Values first section confuses right action and values and needs a copy edit, moving and wikifying
Socratic dialogues could do with some tidying and clarification. See the talk page for one suggested change.
Problem of universals: The introductory definition is (perhaps) fixed. But, the article is poor. Check out the German version.
Teleology: the article is shallow and inconsistent.
Existentialism: the quality of this article varies wildly and is in desperate need of expert attention.
Star of Sophia Vote for or nominate someone you think is deserving!
Analytic_philosophy This is a very major topic, but still has several sections which are stubs, and several topics which are not covered.
Inverse (logic) This article makes me wish that there were a fail grade on the quality scale. Someone should rewrite it.
lifeworld A philosophical concept that seems to have fallen exclusively into the hands of the sociologists. Could use some attention; it's a major and complex issue in phenomenology.
Madhyamaka is a Buddhistphilosophical tradition that asserts that all phenomena are empty of "self-nature" or "essence" (Sanskrit: Svabhāva), that they have no intrinsic, independent reality apart from the causes and conditions from which they arise.
Madhyamaka is the rejection of two extreme philosophies, and therefore represents the "middle way" between eternalism (the view that something is eternal and unchanging) and nihilism (the assertion that all things are intrinsically already destroyed or rendered nonexistent. This is nihilism in the sense of Indian philosophy, and may differ somewhat from Western philosophical nihilism).
