But according to historic Christianity (and other monotheistic religions), gratitude flows upward from receiver to giver and eventually to the Unmoved Mover, The Giver, and in so doing, edifies the grateful person. In so doing, it also fosters true humility and in a sort of negative-feedback system creates more gratitude.

In my personal experience, it is gratitude that shows love best. Love is the chiefest thing, but gratitude gives love fuel and a fertile field from which to grow.

It may be possible to give thanks to something impersonal, but I do not think it is reasonable to do so. It is unreasonable to give thanks to something that will never know our thanks, and it is unreasonable to try to reason with something that cannot reason, such as the sun. As Professor Furrow argues, the giving of a benefit belongs to the intention of the giver; it is a rational choice. I am thankful for the sun, but I am not thankful to the sun.

It has to be determined what the perspective of the philosopher is in regards to gratitude. The philosopher regards gratitude in relation to Wisdom. If philosophy is the love of Wisdom, it is the pursuit of Wisdom through love. No one wants to become wise without loving Wisdom. If philosophy has an essence to it, it is Wisdom. The philosopher is grateful to those who help them become wise. The philosopher is grateful for that which is conducive to becoming wise. Gratitude, then, follows upon love.

The pursuit of philosophy is a social endeavor. As Professor Furrow points out, there are many people that benefit us whom we may never know. Many people make the pursuit of philosophy possible for us, too many to even imagine. There are the people that built the school, the people that keep the school running, bus drivers that bring people to school, and the list goes on and on. Without society there could be no pursuit of philosophy.

It is unreasonable to give thanks to things that will never have any knowledge of our thanks, that is a form of talking to oneself. It is especially unreasonable when we neglect to give thanks to those people who have benefited us. Again, as Professor Furrow points out, we will never know all the people that have benefited us. The best way to give thanks might be to be as reasonable as possible to all those we come across, whether we know them or not.

In response to Professor Rosenstand’s thoughts on the reception or the difficulty of receiving gratitude, I wonder if that difficulty is based on a false humility. It seems that the overtly proud person is willing to receive any gratitude whether or not they are deserving of it. I also wonder if we have difficulty in receiving gratitude because we are not actually grateful ourselves. It may be that many of us were brought up to say thank you because it is polite to do so. How sincere our thanks is is another matter. There should be no difficulty in receiving gratitude if we our truly thankful persons. For the sake of argument, say someone is grateful for the way I write, there should be no difficulty in receiving the gratitude without being boastful. If I do write well, it would be due to the efforts of many people. To receive gratitude well would be a way to give thanks to those that helped me. Those that cannot receive gratitude well might be those that attribute to much to themselves. False humility can mask the injustice done to others.

It is the mark of the intelligent person to be grateful. It is the intelligent person that knows they have been benefited and by whom.
Again, as Professor Furrow points out, it is the mark of the intelligent person to know they have also been benefited by persons unknown. To all those that have helped me become more intelligent I give thanks.