Let’s suppose that a group of us were committed to philosophizing in the sense of “philosophy as a way of life” (Pierre Hadot).
Let’s suppose that, ostensibly, we developed two “knacks.” Say we developed the knack for finding out what, right now, in oneself, and between us is “existentially salient.” Were that to be so, then it could be said that we’d become attuned to existential salience–to wit, to whatever unspecified “something” is undeniably “here for us.” No definition of existential salience can be supplied, yet we all have the felt sense that, yes, such and such is existentially salient.
Furthermore, let’s suppose that we were able to come to a high level of facility with the art of philosophical inquiry. The latter, first finding what is existentially salient, proceeds by bringing us to greater clarity or knowledge than we could have imagined or conceived of. That arrival at knowledge is always surprising, always fresh, ever germane.
If we were to become so attuned to existential salience and if we were to become facile in the art of philosophical inquiry, would both bring us closer to shared, living wisdom? Indeed, would both put us in touch with shared, living wisdom?
This is the question, which is also the hypothesis.