/lit/ - Literature

The useful parts of philosophy are called science. The other parts can easily be disregarded.

>>12983521
The cancer that is nineteenth century philosophy. Literally diarrhea-tier. There are exceptions, of course. But the mainstream was truly retarded.

>>12983521
>>12983535
>>12983548
Literally kill yourselves.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NF96SXSIj0s

>>12983521
>Females in STEM
Looooooooooooooool funnyass comic OP

>>12983521

1. YOU MEAN «SCIENCISTS», NOT «SCIENTISTS».

2. IT IS ONLY CONGRUENT THAT SCIENCISTS NEGLECT, AND DISREGARD, PHILOSOPHY, SINCE SCIENTISM IS AN ANTISCIENTIFIC, ILLUMINISTIC, CULT DEVOTED TO THE INSTRUMENTALIZATION OF HUMANS; SCIENTISM IS A BRANCH OF THE TREE OF ZIONISM.

>>12983584
Too based for a tripfag

>>12983521
Holy shit this debate is so frustrating
>Philosophy created the scientific method
>There's no evidence for that! Show me one thing philosophy has done!
>Well philosophy justifies the scientific method, why would we seek for truth that doesnt help us at all? Whats ethical in science? These are all philosophical questions!
>No evidence for that at all; show me one thing philosophy has done.

>>12983643
>Well philosophy justifies the scientific method
It doesn't
>why would we seek for truth that doesnt help us at all?
We shouldn't
>Whats ethical in science?
Philosophy has no answers for this

>>12983560
I'm not watching your onions bullshit. The useful parts of philosophy are called science. The other parts can easily be disregarded.

>>12983535

>>12983677
Ethics

>>12983668
>Whats ethical in science?
Science has no answer for that, so it leaves the space blank and begins vivisecting everyone. Science is now really fucking horny

>>12983668
That's just obviously wrong my friend

>>12983690
Ethics hasn't been solved by philosophy after 3,000 years. It has yielded billions of words of contradictions with no hope of resolving or proving anything. There isn't even a consensus, let alone a conclusion.

>>12983702
>Ethics hasn't been solved
No one's solved biology/chemistry/physics either bitch
t. STEM chad

>>12983696
What has philosophy concluded about vivisection?

>>12983564
Those are just unkempt guys.

>>12983715
There is a scientific consensus on countless questions in all of those fields. There are infinitely more questions to solve, but infinitely more will be solved.

No ethical question has been solved by philosophy and none ever will be.

>>12983521

"Science" in the STEMlord sense is actually an aspect of Catholicism, so it follows that it is antithetic to the human spirit.

>>12983668
Can I bash your head in with a brick and and study the results to better understand the effects of blunt-force trauma on humans? It'll be helping Science(tm), of course!

>>12983739
You don't know what I look like or where I live, and I don't want you to, so no. No philosophy required for that question.

>>12983702
>There isn't even a consensus, let alone a conclusion
Because ethics is fundamentally a subjective affair that can only be properly investigated by a person equipped with the philosophical tools to make a case-by-case assessment on the ethical course of action in any given situation. This is how you create **good citizens.**

>>12983747
But what if I was positive it would help improve scientific understanding? Maybe it would help reduce car fatalities in the future?

>>12983748
Which philosophical tools?

>>12983750
I still don't want you to, so still no.

>>12983753
Critical thinking, investigation into human motivations, an understanding on what actions/words are most effective vs. those that are least effective, etc.

>>12983739
If philosophy shows that I should have my head bashed in, then sure. Which of the last 3,000 years of philosophical works proves I should have my head bashed in? And what do you say to the works which say yours is wrong?

>>12983755
So, you would say that in this case, the pursuit of science isn't the highest goal? That I should value your life over scientific inquiry?

>>12983760
You can critically think about an ethical situation and reach completely different conclusions depending on your preferences. Philosophy has no bearing on this and can't disprove any ethical conclusion you come up with.

>>12983702
Without the study of ethics you wouldn't have the right to be shitposting right now. Granted I'm assuming you're a woman for your lack of intelligence, but you could also be gay.

>>12983761
If science is the perfect arbiter of truth, wouldn't it make sense that we should pursue it at all costs then? Even if it means some people will have to sacrifice their lives for it?

>>12983767
How did each of the people involved in a ethical scenario come up with their preferences?

>>12983668
>it doesn't
It absolutely does. How do we know science is reliable? What constitutes evidence? Is reason as valuable as empiricism? etc. are all philosophical questions
>We shouldn't
Yet we do. What possible benefit do we gain from the discovery of some uninhabitable planet? Or the biology of penguins? etc.
Most scientists wouldn't agree with you and a purely PHILOSOPHICAL discussion would have to be had concerning this disagreement.
>Philosophy has no answers for this
look up the entire field of ethics.

>>12983765
The term "should value" is nonsense, since we all have our values anyway. Philosophy doesn't say your values are right or wrong; philosophy doesn't say my values are right or wrong. If you want to bash my head in you can find an argument for it, or you can just do it anyway. If I want my head not bashed in I can find an argument against it, or I can just tell you to fuck off. Trying to frame our values in terms of philosophy is just role-playing, since the philosophy of ethics has presented every possible worldview and none of them have been proven or disproven.

>>12983792
What would it take for an ethical worldview to be "proven" or "disproven?"

>>12983784
>How do we know science is reliable? What constitutes evidence? Is reason as valuable as empiricism? etc. are all philosophical questions
which, again, philosophy doesn't actually answer.
>look up the entire field of ethics.
Presenting a smorgasbord of every possible answer from which to pick the answer you want isn't an answer.

>>12983797
It can't be. Which makes the entire field a waste of time.

>>12983801
>Presenting a smorgasbord of every possible answer from which to pick the answer you want isn't an answer.
But reducing thousands of years of thought to generalizing statements like "which, again, philosophy doesn't actually answer." is?

Out of curiosity, what do you base your opinion of "philosophy" on?

>>12983804
Honest question, how do you live your life then? What things drive you, what things do you value? How do you come to decisions in tricky situations?

>>12983521
>PHILOSOPHY FAGS ITT GETTING BUTTHURT
How much time and money have you wasted on tilling that barren field anons?

I agree OP. It seems the issue stems from pop-sci predominantly.

Yes it’s time to realize that the fields are very important. In particular, most people should study certain things like Aristotleian Metaphysics or Game Theory. Game Theory can raise existential questions, Aristotle’s work on Analytics predated logic, a lot of these fields assist computer science and various other sciences. Charles Darwin had obviously been well versed in Aristotle when he had written his book On the Origin of Species.

I don’t understand the antagonism between the two fields. I think it is a rather modern invention, thus solidifying my idea that contemporary society is worse than its ever been. It’s like how no one realizes Descartes quote is attached to a rather long and expansive, sprawling geometrical treatise. I mean, cmon.

:3

Now, who is going to read the Opus Major by Roger Bacon with me after I finish Fibonacci’s book of Squares?

>>12983812
Got a phd paid off my loans now I do what I love in research, fuck around with other grads-also talking and discussing the topics at hand- and work as a TA getting paid way more then I should for essentially fuckin around with my prof. thank you very much

>>12983824
Your mentality towards your own discipline, and making money in general, sucks. :3

>>12983829
A profound statement. On which philosophical thoughts did you base your stance that his mentality sucks?

>>12983824
So you freely admit you are wasting your time?

>>12983832
The idea that slothfulness and avarice are terrible sins, from which the objective critique of any morality stems primarily from. :3

>>12983832
Not him but give up this line of questioning, it's embarrassing. You're not Socrates you're a mewling manchild trying his best to maintain the thin layer of pretension that is scaffolding up a vapid personality.

>>12983809
However I feel like.

You can't follow the Bible without an ingrained preference for which parts to follow and which parts to ignore. You can't use philosophy for ethics without an ingrained preference for which movements/theories to follow and which to ignore. It's the same thing.

>>12983839
Sounds like philosophy to me. Without heretics to attack your position, and advocates to defend it, all using a consistent system of logic and reason to formulate their thoughts, how could you know that the idea that "slothfulness and avarice are terrible sins" is an objective truth, and not a deception that causes greater harm than good?

>>12983808
>Out of curiosity, what do you base your opinion of "philosophy" on?
From reading a lot of philosophy.

>>12983824
>I have fun by accomplishing nothing
Great, you and literally everyone else on 4chan

>>12983856
Perhaps from the objective findings of political science?

After all, a civilization can only last so long before self-destroying due to various sins that they indulge in. Look into the fall of the Roman Empire, for instance. In its last throes, the Roman Empire was hedonistic. I could also recommend you Plato’s Critias, which states a similar thing about the submerged city of Atlantis.

>>12983834
No, I don't studying what I want is improving my life daily I apply the ethics and studies I read everyday making myself a better person. And its helpful because albeit I do fuck around with my TA position teaching comes first I love teaching the undergrads the ropes and hoping they apply the philosophy they learn to everyday life. I still keep in contact with ones that don't go the academia route and they 99% of the time always say they would never change their major its helped them tremendously persuaing the bosses and almost alludes an aura of discipline and wiseness out of every person that learns. So no I'm not wasting my time
>>12983829
I've given many paychecks away so undergrads can stay in school and I study 4hrs and work in TA related duties for 3-4hr. It may sound like a bad attitude but when the foundation of my studies is something I like its hard not to enjoy
myself and feel like im not doing any "work".

>>12983521
For the same reason people think the earth is flat, Joseph smith was a prophet, and Kanye west is talented.


People are retarded from all walks of life because being willing to scrutinize your ideas and engage in a dialogue leaves you with terrifying uncertainty and no friends. You eventually have to get over it and stop caring what people think

>>12983855
Alright, follow-up question - how do you know however you feel like is good, or the right thing to do?

>>12983801
These are all extremely complicated questions with no clear cut answer. Similar questions arise in the fields of physics and psychology yet you would never use this as proof of their worthlessness.

>>12983881
Ahaha this must be a LARP. Where'd you get your PHD a fucking community college? You type like a retard, you sound like a retard, I'm getting the sense you are a retard. Please deliver some more vague platitudes about how Worthy your worthless little profession, I need a laugh.

>>12983784
>How do we know science is reliable? What constitutes evidence? Is reason as valuable as empiricism?
ask a scientist, obviously

>>12983839
>slothfulness and avarice are terrible sins
cringe

>>12983887
Science.

The autism that generally comes with having a knack for the STEM fields is also what precludes them from understanding more big picture things like philosophy and metacognition. Unfortunately, it doesn't stop the overcompensation and god-complex.

>>12983900
I studied in Germany and English is my 4th language that I picked up mostly through osmosis so sorry if I sound like how you say.

>>12983895
Saying science requires philosophy to answer questions philosophy doesn't answer is ludicrous. The useful parts of philosophy are called science. The other parts can easily be disregarded.

>>12983909
Really? How does that work?

>>12983914
>implying philosophers aren't profoundly autistic

>>12983914
>god-complex
Saying science is worthless without you because you have the ability to ask questions you have no idea how to answer is pretty god-complex

>>12983916
Stick to German, you'll probably sound like less of an idiot.

>>12983918
Science has given us the atom bomb. They've only been used against people twice in history, which if fortunate and we should hope it stays that way, but there's also a non-zero chance they could be used again.

Was science "right" to create these atom bombs?

>>12983895
psychology is not a science

>>12983933
>Was science "right" to create these atom bombs?
Science doesn't "create" shit. Through science people found out that an atom bomb was possible. Engineers and physicists and construction workers created them.

Whether creating an atom bomb is right is going to depend on what your ethical principles are but that has nothing to do with science and it's not something philosophy will ever answer.

>>12983855
Every ethical statement is inherently philosophical. Whenever you decide on what you should or shouldn't do in any situation, you are thinking philosophically

>>12983940
t.brainlet

>>12983954
>*fails to replicate 2/3 of accepted results in his field*

>>12983951
It is like that time of the day that we hear there is absolutely no connection between islam and blowings things up.

>>12983951
Well, it kind of does. Science gives us the power to create all sorts of things we've never had the power to before, but if we don't have a critical assessment of what sorts of things we're trying to create, then we will just use the information we gather from science to just keep making more shit to exploit each other (think loot boxes in video games aimed at kids, only possible due to advances in computer technology.)

If you still say "thats just the applications of science, not science itself", then my question is, what's the point of science if we don't apply it?

>>12983954
neither is sociology or anything else beside math, physics and chemistry

>>12983951
So since we can never reach definitive answers to ethical questions, then we should just never think about them? Even if philosophy doesn't give an exact answer, we need philosophy to think about these things

>>12983965
I don't understand this sentence

>>12983668
Why should science exist? Why should we promote scientific research?

>>12983973
>we need philosophy to think about these things even though it will never give us an actual answer
why?

>>12983887
I seems like these people who see no value in the philosophy of ethics are moral nihilists or hedonists, so they basically do whatever they feel like in the moment and don't think about 'right' or 'wrong'.

>>12983982
>Why should science exist? Why should we promote scientific research?
What do you think?

>>12983984
Do you think we should never think about ethical matters?

>>12983976
Then you are a brainlet.

>>12983989
You answer the question first

>>12983976
he’s saying “Islam is like science in that I dislike both of them”

>>12983953
This, this is the most ironic thing about this whole thing

When people say "there's no point to philosophy", that in ITSELF is a philosophical statement, which has its own host of philosophical assumptions and ideas that it rests off.

>>12983984
Stop asking philosophical questions and go back to wageslaving.

>>12983995
>askself-styled philosopher a simple questions
>get disingenuous gotcha question in response
typical. you can think about whatever you want, i won’t stop you

>>12983984
Not him, but the choices are:
A) Do whatever you feel like
B) Plan and rationalize what you do, to the best of your ability (philosophy)
C) Accept a preexisting dogma such as a religion without thinking about it

>>12984005
>When people say "there's no point to philosophy", that in ITSELF is a philosophical statement, which has its own host of philosophical assumptions and ideas that it rests off.
which philosophy also doesn't have an answer for

>>12984007
>>12984010
>haha I redefined philosophy to mean “any type of thinking” so you’ve been doing philosophy all along haha gotcha
every time

>>12984016
Do you have all the answers? Does science? Why is there something and not nothing? Where did the big bang come from? Why do anything at all?

>>12984009
We need philosophy to think about ethics because whenever you decide to do anything in life you are thinking ethically. You make decisions in life based on your basic philosophical assumptions. You can not live life without philosophy. You deciding to wake up in the morning is based on things you value which you have arrived at through philosophy. Every single decision you make is based on philosophical, not scientific, assumptions.

Ye it is not like there were these guys called aristotle, kuhn or popper that did shit you are doing right now, oh nonono science is perfectly created by god and it is PERFECT you brainlets. Why are you asking questions you retarded statistical positivist? We are doing REAL SCIENCE which is obviously logical positivism but without the logic of course, that is not scientific since.. few decades ago. SCIENCE IS PERFECT AND STABLE HUZZAH!

>>12984019
What would you define philosophy as

>>12983521
It's pretty sad how detrimental specialization has been. It used to be praiseworthy for a scientist to go into his studies of the world with a level-headed attitude from being informed of philosophy and other fields of study from a solid liberal education. Now when more than ever our assumptions need to be questioned, and new insights into how we engage with the world should be listened to it gets unjustly put down. Maybe it's because everyday we're reminded of our success of getting material to do what we demand of it. Satisfied by the unquestioned answers the culture gives or ready made McDonald's burger and fries ideologies that require no looking into nor demand it. But this isn't found to be alarming, we're comfortable in our ignorance, and when the scientists find something we should rightly be alarmed by and they conflict with the standing ideologies, who's going to rein them in and put them to question under the microscope? Better an understanding of abstract ideas and concepts be attempted than none at all or worse, a mismanagement by those without care.

>>12984029
name an achievement of philosophy

>>12984038
Agriculture

>>12983584
You are alright you can drop the caps tho

>>12984038
My cock inside your boipucci.

>>12984019
No, if you're thinking about how to toast your toast properly thats not philosophical, but if you're talking about ethics (which is what the convo is about) then that is philosophy. Thinking, questioning, rationalizing about ethics is philosophy.

>>12983716
That it's bad

>>12984038
My cock inside your boipucci jajaja.

>>12984047
is saying 'ethics is nonsense extrapolated from evolved instincts' philosophy

>>12983792
That’s a philosophical argument lol

>>12984038
Name an achievement of science

>>12983925
Based.

>>12984038
Science

>>12984038
The scientific method.

>>12984058
Dropping a nuke on your sorry ass while you're browsing lit on your iPhone©.

>>12984038
my diary desu

Philosophers are the guys serving me coffee when I do my experiments for big bucks.

>>12984067
Are you interested in actual debate or are you just here to numb the shittiness of life by trolling people?

>>12984028
how many platonic dialogues did you need to read before you “decided” to wake up this morning? do you hear yourself?

>>12984067
on my iphone right now it hasent done shit

>>12984082
Why is money valuable? Why are you better than the philosopher because you make more money?

>>12983748
Common core is under constant recreation.

>>12984047
The OP is discussing "fields" as in academic fields. Thinking about your preferences in your own head isn't a "field".
Academic philosophy has resulted in nothing worthwhile in at least 100 years if not longer. Doesn't matter if I decide I like toast or science or whatever, I'm not reading journals to determine that and not a single other person on planet Earth is reading journals to determine those things. Philosophy as a field is a waste.

>>12984037
>haha dude look at this /pol/ meme picture ugh why don’t scientists question anything any more?
if you are the result of a “solid liberal education” I’m glad most scientists don’t get one

>>12984065

>>12984052
Yes, call it biological determinism, ethical nihilism, or whatnot. It sounds pretty philosophical to me.

>>12984088
Because that is life you brainlet. Philosophers are scientist larpers. They were too dumb to understand math so now they serve coffee 12 hours a day and think about rationalizations of not killing themselves.

>>12984120
>that is life
Explain what that statement means

>>12984117
It's taken strictly from an empirical perspective. Humans evolved so human's concepts of ethics is some kind of incoherent bundle of dispositions that helped them survive.

>>12984010
>feel like you should do something
>do it
vs.
>feel like you should do something
>come up with long-winded intellectual justification for doing it
>do it
wow what a tremendous difference philosophy has made in my life

>>12984125
Go give your lil socratic questions to cashiers and weed guys.

>>12984130
The belief that empirical evidence is valuable is a philosophical statement

>>12984120
That doesn't explain anything, anon. Ad hominems are logically fallacious. Try again in deducing why it is that you are allegedly more valuable for making more money than a barista with a philosophy degree.

>>12984052
Yes, it is. It relies on several philosophical assumptions, such as:

>reality is reducible to the material element
>we can determine reality perfectly through studying the physical world
>studying the physical world will reveal to us the best way to behave in the world

and so on and so on.

Philosophy is just one big DUDE WEED LMAO. I know a guy who is into it and he is working in retail his whole life. I buy clothes there lel.

>>12984090
It seems like OP is referring to all philosophy, inside and outside of academia. Of course philosophy in academia rarely produces anything, but that neither discredits all of philosophy nor the entire philosophical tradition of history.

>>12984120
Perhaps the way society is organized is not correct. Now that being said, I’m not going to go so far as to say that people who study philosophy are smarter than your average scientist.

But I wouldn’t say that people who study science are smarter than your average philosopher, either.

Especially considering the fact that both modern philosophers and scientists are extremely lacking in the ability to study things sufficiently.

I see both sides ITT bragging about their ability to make money. I see no one ITT bragging about their ability to understand things well. :3

>>12984120
What are you trying to prove exactly here?

>>12984139
Why is working in retail bad? Please give an answer that relies on no philosophical assumptions

>>12983521
>tfw i bust my ass everyday working as one of three economist managing a big ass insurance firm making big decisions,studying how are numbers flow, the current situation of the times etc etc. Literally moving economic currents
>get paid like whatever although my job is extremely important and have qualifications up the ass for it
>dont care phil. of economics is my passion
>apply and suggest things ive read from marx to adam smith
>come on lit after a slow and hard day ass sweating profusely
>70% of this thread is trashing philosophy saying its useless
>mfw

>>12984138
It really only relies on the first one. There is no assumption of perfection nor memery about 'the best way to behave' rather it just says that ethics, like all other behavior, evolved because it helped reproduction.

>>12984133
So you don't actually have any arguments and don't want to even consider the value of philosophy, alright

>>12984136
I dont need to deduce anything to you. Unlike you I have a good life which doesnt involve studying occultism and having autistic hobby.

>>12984146
Exactly. Not sure why, but a lot of these people actually have not graduated college yet. They’d be willing to trash other disciplines without actually having graduated college?? Why? :3

>>12984146
>working at an insurance firm
the 70% was right.

>>12984153
Sour grapes and concealed insecurity is my bet.

>>12984150
There is no value in it just like alchemy it is useless and should be abolished.

>>12984148
You're right, i did kind of fuck up with my examples, but even still your idea still relies on the idea that using science (empiricism) can give us data that accurately reflects reality, which anyone who's even just watched a 5 minute video of epistemology on youtube would know is less certain that it seems

That's not to say I'm doubting your claims about ethics = evolved instincts, rather that its a claim that still relies on philosophical assumptions nonetheless

>>12984132
It looks to me like you have no meta-cognition, no self-restraint, can't critically examine yourself, and can't rethink your life choices. It looks like you've got the thought process of a child.

I want philosophyfags to go kill themselves or move to different board.

>>12984154
Third biggest insurance firm in the US, 1# in my state and pretty much most of the south

>>12984160
what's your goal in life?

>>12984160
What makes something valuable and worthy of existence?

>>12984164
Why are you on /lit/ in the first place? Honest question.

>>12984083
It's clear that you're too materially retarded to realize the premise that the reality is reducible to materialism is actually true.

>>12984164
Philosophyfags moving out of lit is absurd but it would be an improvement for them.
We would not have to tolerate your idiocy.

>>12984161
>relies on the idea that using science (empiricism) can give us data that accurately reflects reality,
It relies on that because it has clear effects in the real world. Science is vindicated every time you start your car by the demonstrable application of its theory. Evolutionary biology is much less certain than more rigorous science but it's still the most reasonable explanation for human behavior.

What other source is there that an accurately reflect reality, other than experience in the world?

>>12984159
My bet as well. Cheers sir, have a good day :3

>>12984165
>my useless firm is the third biggest useless firm in the country haha take that
the only thing worse than a philosopher is an ec*nomist

>>12983914
As a STEMfag I find philosophy majors way more infuriating as they act like they are the only people who can read
I met some extremely nice people with msc/phd in philosophy but for some reason the ones one the internet are completely insufferable

>>12984163
You can reexamine yourself at will rather than trying to impose some random dead white guy's ideology on yourself.

>>12984175
To discuss literature and memes and not to polute this board with retarded philosophy. Go to his or reddit.

>>12984161
>>12984181
Why does every single science vs. philosophy debate basically equate to ‘how I interpret reality hurrrr’. There are some larger things to debate here than interpretation of reality or making money

:3.

>>12984179
Yes go away and take jezebel posters with you.

>>12984188
>There are some larger things to debate here
state them

>>12984183
That wasn’t his mentality. You just greentexted your mentality if you had made a post like that. Immature child.

:3

>>12984182
Να'σαι kαλά αδελφέ :)

>>12984184
most people on the internet are insufferable.

>>12984143
Bcuz wee money

It's the other way around.
(Modern) science is either useless or evil.

DUDEEEEEEEEEEEE WEEEEEEEEEEEEEDD CANT KNOW NUFFIN

>>12984184
Almost everybody is insufferable on the internet.

>>12984103
Why the insults anon? Yeah it's 4chins and it's in vogue to call whatever you don't like /pol/ (I only visit /lit/) but it's near impossible to get a good liberal education these days unless you have the money. I just see it as a goal that I haven't attained but I'm happy to reach for.

>>12984171
There is no such thing as value

>>12984202
Neuroscience is the forefront of ethics if you're actually even remotely serious about the life.

>>12984181
>What other source is there that an accurately reflect reality, other than experience in the world?

I actually agree that experience is the best tool we have for discerning reality, but where I'd probably disagree with is that our sensory experience of reality is a perfect image of reality. There's just too many things that can't be explained by our senses alone (dreams? phantom noises? the mind's power to create associations? etc.) that I can't help but feel that there's more to it than that.

>>12984067
Not an achievement

>>12984192
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=gozxtZUkZhQ

>>12984088
Money allows me to live

>>12984186
Philosophy is explicitly allowed to go here, if you have a problem with that that's an issue with you, not the board

>>12984047
What is properly?

>>12984222
Ok, great, that's a valid reason to value money. Now, how about earning more money than you need to live though? What about earning money to buy fancy cars, or trips to the Bahamas, etc.?

>>12984227
Philosophy is humanities retardednesstier and should be locked in his.

>>12984218
Why not? Improving the gene pool for the future of humanity is an achievement.

>>12983521
It's pretty simple: if you make a philosophy vs. science dichotomy up, you neither understand philosophy nor science.

>>12983841
Haha BTFO

>>12984193
Epistemology. Which is why that comic exists in the first place.

The way you obtain scientific knowledge teleologically, is a good intersection between the ‘sets’ of knowledge of science and philosophy. Ptolemy touches on that in his Almagest. Book XIV, as it were. How they derive some of his findings and how they fact check them, and even the questions of why. If any of you had ever read any literature that wasn’t philosophy or science textbooks/primary sources you would be reading some mathematical/scientific primary sources. Which are valuable across time because of your ability to see how knowledge is acquired and preserved. These are the sorts of debates which would require extensive amounts of reading though.

That being said I did have some fascinating, eye-opening discussions regarding Aristotleian Metaphysics and Proclus’ interpretation of Euclid’s first book of the Elements some time late last year. It really is a shame that this is rare these days. For whatever reason, people are getting more and more heated and more irritable about ‘distinctions’. :3

They need to find God

>>12984237
you're not the boss of /lit/

>>12984213
>Neuroscience is the forefront of ethics
What if you don’t think Neuroscience is ethical?

:3

>>12984236
That is living

>>12984151
How do you know that what you live is 'the good life'? Your life remains unexamined, I don't envy this lack of introspection into your own very existence. Attempting to dismiss my assuming I study the occult is just another way for you to gain cognitive closure. You refuse to think.

>>12984249
Too bad, you'll be neurosurgurically modified to think otherwise.

>>12984246
Yes I am. I am the real G. You are just a lil nigglet.

>>12984251
So to you, living = buying nice stuff? How did you come to this conclusion?

(I'm not saying you're wrong I'm just curious to know)

>>12984252
Thinking is degenerate and will kill the white man.

This whole Science vs Philosophy thing reminds of Darwin, Schopenhauer, Nietzsche...and Steve Jobs. It's all about power, dominance. We can see it pretty clear in this thread. And THIS is life.

Btw, here's a picture of a cute 2D girl.

>>12984255
You joke, but that is of course the beginning of a fascist state. A materialistic one, as well.

You see now that the worst communist/fascist empires were started because of workers movements like Communism: ones that deprecated the existence of God and were heavily materialistic.

Now this stupid mentality of being able to completely materialize the brain is trying to take hold. I’m definitely glad I exist. Now less people take medicine/pills because of me. :3

>>12984256
If you really are the bost of /lit/, then can I ask you to ban jezebleposting once and for all?

>>12984266
It shouldn’t be versus at all. That’s what the real point should be. I think we should ask ourselves why does this increasingly materialistic engine seek divisions where there shouldn’t be any?

See
>>12984243

>>12984266
Naaaaahhh,
That's just you projecting your views in the thread in order to legitimize them.

>>12984195
>That wasn’t his mentality
because he is worthless, as are you

>>12984249
Then you're stupid

>>12984268
You reject the premises of materialism. The only fate for you is to abolish that obscene ironic distance and embrace it fully. Again, too bad loser.

>>12984209
the chart is literally a /pol/ meme. that was not an insult.

>>12984286
Why is it so important that the world follows the premises of materialism?

>>12984286
Hah I’ll probably make more money than you ever will while being against the philosophy of scientific ‘materialism’, as you put it.
>>12984283
You will have to prove to me that universities and colleges are ‘smart’ completely, and not just composed of true AND false things, specifically of scientific institutions.

:3. Thanks.

>>12984277
DESTRUCTO DISK!

>>12984296
I don't think that it's important nor unimportant. It's simply inevitable side effect of reality.

>>12984317
Everyone knows your posting, and this one in particular, is just stupid. Just misinformed and, frankly, incorrect.

:3

>>12984258
No, living is the state of being alive.

>>12984317
Honest question, do you see a scenario where a world embracing materialism doesn't descend into some sort of totalitarian communist/fascist/plutocratic dystopia?

>>12984317
They used to say that about idealism back in the day.

>>12984305
You won't make more money when the AI firm predicts everything that you do based on your DNA and outplay you before you even realize it. In fact, it's already happening. Antimaterialism is a mark of inferior mind who is incapable of imaging the reality.

>>12984325
I'm confused, why did you say that buying nice cars is living then?

>>12984333
Envinronmental factors are nothing?

>>12984333
Why would we willingly create such a dystopia?

>>12984341
With good intensions which pave the road to...?

>>12984324
How come? All you've done is empty posturing.

>>12984341
>we
you won’t create it, you’ll just live in it

>>12984327
We're already in a dystopia. It's no difference anyways.

>>12984350
Who will create it then? And why?

>>12984289
That's ok. It was just to elicit (yous) anyway. I know Bill Nye took back his thoughts on philosophy.

Do you agree though that it's bad to have an attitude like that towards philosophy?

>>12984340
Why do you think scientists study ecology retard.

>>12984352
It already happened and is happening retard.

>>12984352
Who?
people who are better at math than you
>Why?
because they’ll be paid well for it and ethical questions are for coping poorfags

>>12984335
Is it not living?

>>12984359
Not this def. of "envinroment", genius.

>>12984372
>hurr durr words are whatever I define them to be!
Congrats?

Ahh the good old philosophy. It is nonsense and should not be taken seriously. Philosophy is like gender studies degree. For retards who are a waste and should be killed on the spot.

>>12984385
http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/environmental-factors.html

I am done with you.

>>12984335
You need to be alive to buy cars genius

>>12984355
black science man is the only one there who said something wrong and didn’t take it back

>>12983535
bait, but
>are
>be

>>12984417
jesus christ

All these sciencefags in the thread make me feel like I'm at Reddit

>>12984368
Let me guess, you imagine yourself to be a part of this "mathematical elite?"

>>12984394
From what I'm gathering it seems moral nihilists are particularly hostile, if not apathetic of philosophy. This clears up a lot, thanks amoral anon.

>Science so cool!!!

>I can't wait for my new iphone built by SCIENCE so I can forget about the WORLD and spend my time playing GAMES!!!

>I believe in SCIENCE, not God

>btw, did I say that I am an ATHEIST, Reddit?

>>12984428
no, I’m not imagining it

>>12984431
Whatever you say bucko.

>>12984445
In that case, why do you willingly want to create a dystopia?

>>12984210
Then how do you decide what to do in life?

>>12984457
I dont only you do cause you stupid little nigger.

>>12984459
So you don't do anything?

>>12984459
Do you have any goals?

>>12983521
>>>/sci/
>>>/his/

>>12984453
I already answered this.

>>12984471
So you want to create a dystopia for financial gain? I'll be completely honest, that's incredibly foolish and myopic of you

>>12984222
Does the philosopher barista starve to death? Are they homeless? It seems like they make enough money to live, so why are you better than them for making more money than is required to fulfill the basic necessities of life?

>I am the wisest man alive, for I know one thing, and that is that I know nothing
>Those who have a 'why' to live, can bear with almost any 'how'
>Every man takes the limits of his own field of vision for the limits of the world
>Two things fill the mind with ever-increasing wonder and awe, the more often and the more intensely the mind of thought is drawn to them: the starry heavens above me and the moral law within me

>>12983564
>>12983723
They're trannies

>>12983521
philosophy is studying topics before they are feasible to examine scientifically. it won't die out because there's always new things to discover in the physical world

I don't understand why anyone would want to be a science worshipping materialist

>>12984515
Materialism is an defence mechanism to keep the ego intact in a world devoid of spirit

>>12984477
Cry about it.

Philosophy is just like that ye you know that one time when it happened and then it got like you know what I am saying ya feel?

>>12984534
I will, actually. I take life seriously and lament every time truth and beauty is forsaken for short-term financial gain.

>>12984541
lel how does it feel knowing I plow cunnies day and night while some cunny reads plato to me?

>>12984541
He is just a pretender.
A true dystopia needs no end goal other than itself or the "improvement" of it's society.

>>12984546
It makes me feel very little in all honesty.

>>12984405
Still a subset of ecology.

>>12984549
Based.

>>12984575
Fuck off

>>12984512
Thank you.

A culture without philosophical inquiry is unlikely to produce a Newton of Leibniz. How are we to expect science of the mind to advance unless we consider the nature of the mind and how it is constituted beyond just throwing tons of data around, given we are well short of any coherent understanding of consciousness or how it relates to the structure of though?

>>12984485
>Does the philosopher barista starve to death? Are they homeless?
Yes

>>12984485
Because it makes me live more

>>12983521
obligatory

>>12984849
That's not what philosophy is though, that's like saying science is just "running numbers through a calculator"

>>12984897
Right, yeah, it’s not too funny.

Then again it’s just an /attempt/ at humor. One would hope they aren’t serious.

>>12984839
In what capacity? Is material gain necessarily equivalent to greater life? What if the philosopher barista is perfectly content with their modest life and yearns for nothing more than what they have?

>>12984897
Right, yeah, it’s not too funny.

Then again it’s just an /attempt/ at humor. One would hope they aren’t serious. :3

>>12984835
Then how do they continue to exist and go to their job as a barista every day?

>>12983535
very well done, incredible economy of words. take notes anons

>>12984912
>>12984907

>>12984527
How do you have a world without matter in the first place?

>>12985060
You can have the world of Mind, or Ideas, or Spirit (whatever term you want to use) which the world of matter is contained within

>>12985060
How do you have a world without the mental conception of what "world" is?

>>12985134
The world doesn't exist, I know that because I have erased my concept of the world in my mind.

>>12985211
Are you implying that the sense perceptions immediate to you are "the world"? It's possible, albeit solipsistic, to deny the existence of the world without contradiction.

>>12985211
And I erased the concept of mind from my mind altogether, see ya samsaracucks

>>12985251
Except you didn't Because I erased you before you got the chance

>>12984417
>can are
so this is the power of philosophy..

>>12983643
>philosophy justifies the scientific method
>>12983895
>These are all extremely complicated questions with no clear cut answer.
So philosophy is so powerful it can't prove any concept or answer anything, but it also justifies science, but if you ask how it justifies science, philosophers get mad and post internet cartoons mocking reddit

great thread everybody

>>12984444
>a kid at school told me if I downloaded this picture it would be easier to make fun of people
The useful parts of philosophy are called science. The other parts can easily be disregarded.

>>12983668
It's tiresome that wannabe philosophers want to give a positive answer to each of these to justify their doing. Philosophy should be dropped from unis. Instead they should do reasoning and argument and scientific tooling courses. Philosophy should become an autodidact discipline and self practice.

>>12984047
>implying toasting does not involve properties of toast and heating devices
Pseud

Science works. Philosophy doesn't. Simple.