IF YOU were prone to using reality TV shows as a cultural barometer, you would long ago have dismissed today's youngsters as a generation of celebrity-obsessed airheads whose idea of a high-brow philosophical debate is an argument over which D-listers have had their breasts enlarged.
The prospect of members of the Big Brother household discussing transcendental idealism or Plato's theory of ideas is as far-fetched as John McCririck praising Germaine Greer for her contribution to feminism or Jade Goody expressing a sincere inter
est in the history of Bollywood cinema. Although there is plenty of opportunity for naval-gazing in such shows, there is never any suggestion the experience prompts contestants to ponder the nature of their own existence. Despite protracted bouts of weeping, they rarely seem able to think beyond their next outfit.
Yet, figures out last week suggest that away from our TV screens young people are becoming increasingly interested in contemplating big questions about the universe. The number of Scottish pupils choosing to study philosophy has risen by 41% in the last five years from 755 in 2003 to 1,067 in 2007, leaving some secondaries struggling to cope with the surge in demand.
Cynics have suggested the growth in the subject's popularity may be due to it being perceived as a "Mickey Mouse" subject. With no right or wrong answers, they imply, students are guaranteed to pass. Yet even those with the most tangential experience of philosophy know that lack of a definitive right answer is exactly what makes the subject difficult. To study philosophy you have to do more than learn a list of rules and adhere to them, you have to probe, challenge, engage in the critical process.
So what is it about the subject that makes it attractive to a generation raised on games consoles and MTV? Is it possible we are seeing a backlash against a dumbed-down culture that prefers the tangible to the abstract and instant gratification to deferred pleasure?
In one sense, it's not surprising intelligent young people are searching for deeper meaning in the prevailing superficiality. In an increasingly secular world, philosophy might seem like an irrelevance, but, with God out of the equation for many people, there is an even more pressing need to pose questions such as: why are we here?
One Catholic-turned-atheist colleague says a downside of rejecting God is the loss of a religious calendar that gives structure and rhythm to life: there is a certain comfort to be derived from moving from Christmas through Lent to Easter; from Baptism through Confirmation and Communion to Marriage. Parted from this theological security blanket, is it any wonder young people should seek answers on the meaning of life elsewhere?
Hardline atheists may see science as the be-all and end-all, but it is clear that most people (believers and non-believers alike) need their spirits nurtured as well as their intellects. So as faith in God has diminished, a fascination with other mysteries has grown: crystals, tarot cards, runes and divination tools have replaced Holy Water and incense; expeditions to significant locations such as rainforests or Mayan or Incan sites have replaced traditional religious pilgrimages.
Most revealing of all is the way in which humanist ceremonies have grown up as a substitute for traditional Christenings and weddings. You would think, wouldn't you, that those who scorn religious "superstitions", would settle for a bland civil ceremony. Yet many humanists weddings are brimful of rituals such as the Celtic handfasting ceremony during which cords are draped over the couple's hands and they swear an oath not dissimilar to the vows made before God at religious weddings.
All of which suggests human beings have an innate need to attach significance to their lives. Philosophy promises not so much to provide them with answers, but to equip them with the skills to start asking questions.
Not of course that our interest in philosophy has ever faded away. A consideration of how best to live our lives is ubiquitous in the arts: from Winnie the Pooh (Pooh is a Taoist) to the Simpsons (Homer is an Epicurean while Marge is a Stoic). Antoine de Saint-Exupery's book The Little Prince posed questions about the world that would challenge many an academic, while Sophie's World – a book about a girl who engages in a series of philosophical dialogues with a mysterious man called Alberto Knox – makes philosophy accessible for today's young readers.
Philosopher Alain de Botton believes that far from being irrelevant, an understanding of philosophy can influence our lives on a daily basis. On his Channel 4 series Philosophy: A Guide To Happiness, he analysed the work of several great philosophers then showed how their theory could help change attitudes. In one, he explained how Seneca lived in a world where treachery and random violence meant you lived every day as if it were your last. If, he said, you approached a long car journey with the same mindset – that you were bound to encounter traffic jams and bad driving along the way, then you would meet these hurdles with philosophical resignation; if not, you would suffer road rage.
So let's not be too quick to denounce the increase in Scottish schoolchildren studying philosophy as self-indulgent navel-gazing with no practical application. Socrates said the unexamined life was not worth living. At worst the pupils who choose this subject will develop critical faculties that will stand them in good stead; at best they will find meaning and purpose where once there was none.
