Stephen asked:

What is the primary goal of the philosopher, and to what extent is a mastery of the art of
argumentation indispensable as a means to the end of attaining that goal?

============

Philosophers love argument. I don't just mean that they love arguing. I mean that philosophers are in
love with the Platonic ideaof argument. Plato invented a special name for it, dialectic.

Yet Plato, most famously in the Republic, also talked about the importance of philosophic vision. The
ultimate aim of philosophy is to seek an undistorted vision of intelligible reality, made possible by the
light of 'the Good'.

Plato's view implies that goodness is somehow part of the structure of ultimate reality. That's a hard
position to defend. It might still be the primary goal of the philosopher to seek out The Good,
however, even if there were no certainty of success.

I can't speak for Plato, I can only speak for myself. I cannot say with any confidence what the primary,
or ultimate goal of philosophy is, or might be. I only know that I find certain questions gripping. I also
hold certain tentative views. And because holding a view implies that one believes - however heavily
one qualifies that belief - in a 'truth', part of my essential activity as a philosopher is seeking to
persuadeother philosophers of that truth. This is the purpose of the 'art of argumentation'.

The English metaphysician F.H. Bradley wrote in the Preface to his great treatise Appearance and
Realityin 1893:

Metaphysics is the finding of bad reasons for what we believe upon instinct, but to find these
reasons is no less an instinct.

I have strong sympathy with Bradley's view, even though it might seem to be less true of philosophy
in general, than the particular aspect of philosophical inquiry known as metaphysics. Yet no-one
wishes to be deceived by fallacious reasoning. So it becomes a kind of goal in itself to sharpen and
hone ones powers of reasoning. We do so even when all light is shut out and we cannot see what
views are ultimately worth attacking or defending. Sadly, many contemporary philosophers find
themselves in this predicament.

Geoffrey Klempner