Philosophy is not enough. Reason tells me that the ancient sages missed the point in naming the highest of human arts. Philos + sophos, love + wisdom; is philosophy just the relationship of love and wisdom? I intuit that both are necessary, but not sufficient. The two in isolation allow for far too much dilettantism. Love and wisdom do not exist alone in any setting. There is always risk. The missing element, to me, is direction. Therefore, I would recommend philos + telos + sophos, love + aim + wisdom, philotelosophy, the relationship among love, aim, and wisdom. Earlier today I posted that there are goals for all behaviors. Most are poorly understood, but they are precise nonetheless. The love of aim and wisdom would bring us nearer to understanding why we, animals in possession of the gift of reason, do what we do.