Philosophy

[Anonymous No.5777667]

Has science left philosophy obsolete?

Are people still doing philosophy? What can philosophy do?

[Anonymous No.5777680]

Philosophy will always be necessary to research and think about.

Nietzsche's work is not yet done, quite. He dreamed of a world unlike ours, where people understood and recognized morality a bit more solidly.

[Anonymous No.5778163]

philosophy is used by those who have political goals.
It has and will always be the guideline of politicians, for this world is to be ruled like Atlantis would have been. This world is The New World, in order with Atlantis.

Read Critias (what is a good civilization) and The Republik (what would a world of that civilization look like), in that order by Plato to see.

[Anonymous No.5778167]

>>5777667
Philosophy is interested in other topics.
It is like asking if histiory is obsolete because we have math.

[Anonymous No.5778176]

>>5777667
Philosophy is just a language game.

[Anonymous No.5778194]

What does it mean for something to become obsolete? What is usefulness? Do we have a common goal? How so? Are we even reaching for something? Do we really want that? How come?

You are doing philosophy yourself, OP.

[Anonymous No.5778196]

You understand that science a branch of philosophy right?

[Anonymous No.5778333]

>>5777667
Philosophy isn't necessary but its a fun hobby. It helps people understand themselves better and gives up a better appreciation of different cultures.

But to answer your question Philosophy will never be as important as Science. Any self absorbed teenager can learn philosophy. Its always been a pseudo-intellectual's affair, it's not hard to understand the metaphysical because any interpretation is technically valid.

[Anonymous No.5778348]

Philosophy and Science dont interact, the only reason they are associated is that used to be practised by the same people

[Anonymous No.5778353]

Science is just a handicraft, it solves practical problems, its useful, that's it
Philosophy can be much more

[Anonymous No.5778362]

>>5778353
>its useful
>thats it
Thats it? Philosophy will never be as important as science because it isn't useful. No one ever benefited from philosophy, everyday we all benefit from advances in science.

[Anonymous No.5778363]

the image at the top isn't even real
the "Hubble" images are all fake. They even admit themselves to hiring artists to colour the images to make them look pretty, they just haven't announced the artists are drawing the things in the first place yet

[Anonymous No.5778366]

>>5777680
>Guys seriously, philosophy is really important guiz! SERIOUSLY! I PAID thousands in TUITION! IT can't be USELESS! IT JUST CAN'T! MY PROFESSOR TOLD ME THAT IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT!

LOL

[Anonymous No.5778370]

>>5778362
>No one ever benefitted from philosophy
Philosophy created scientific thought

[Anonymous No.5778372]

>>5778370
And after it did that, philosophy instantly became useless for everything.

Everything philosophy tries to do, science does infinitely better.

hahahah faggot

>b-but muh feels

[Anonymous No.5778373]

>>5778362
>No one ever benefited from philosophy
What is legal philosophy and why are you an idiot?

[Anonymous No.5778375]

>>5778370
We're starting to fall into a "muh science" circlejerk here so get ready.

[Anonymous No.5778380]

>>5778372
>Everything philosophy tries to do, science does infinitely better.

[Anonymous No.5778385]

>>5778373
>desperately grasping at straws

Face the facts, your philosophy degree is absolutely useless. Anything philosophy does, science does with much greater accuracy.

Scientific method forever.

[Anonymous No.5778390]

>>5778380
Its true,

Philosophy hasn't saved anyone from Polio. Philosophy didn't create your computer where you sneer at my post.
Philosophy won't bring us closer to a utopic state, SCIENCE WILL BITCHES

[Anonymous No.5778392]

science is really impoverished because it only studies the accidental qualities of things (like their volume, mass, shape, etc.) on doesn't ever get to the essence or nature of things. In particular modern science has a fetish for mathematics, and mathematics only studies the quantities of things. This has lead to a reductionism which is always breaking matter down into smaller bits - "atoms are the fundamnetal building blocks of matter and the whole Universe, every thing arises out of atoms - No! Sub-atomic particles are the fundamental constituents of matter - No! You haven't heard of String Theory" - meanwhile these scientists have no definition of "matter", they have no interest in understanding what matter is, they are content with measuring it.
this leads to an epistemological pessimism that most scientists have where nothing is knowable, there can only be "models" that allow us to manipulate matter. This is the epistemology of a wizard - there is no objective reality, reality is just something you manipulate with magical spells (or scientific formulae). The scientist is the modern wizard, and, in fact, this is literally true in that the founders of science were themselves wizards/alchemists/occultists. Francis Bacon set the project of science out clearly - we don't want to know the essence or teleology of things anymore, we just want to be able to perform miracles like making a person live for hundreds of years, flying in the air, and so on. Childish.

[Anonymous No.5778393]

>>5778390
I laughed

[manginus !!6P/WhzicJTl No.5778394]

>>5777667
philosophy can make you a better or a worse person. it's also good training for thinking with clarity or depth, for improving your capacity for problem-solving, among other things. a person who wanted to be a good scientist, a good statesman, a good anything really could potentially benefit from the study of philosophy

[Anonymous No.5778401]

Science is nothing but an archive, there is no such thing as practical or applied science

[Anonymous No.5778404]

>>5778333
Underrated Post
>>5778401
Stupidest post in the thread
>>5778196
Science has become more important than philosophy ever will be.

[Anonymous No.5778406]

Why do People look so desperately for answers to metaphysical/philosophical questions in science these days? Astrophysics for example, or just Quantum Physics in general.

Surely they must understand that by definition science can never come to a certain conclusion or "solution" (outside of maybe mathematics, but even in the applied version of that, physics, it doesnt seem like there are necessarily definitive rules etc, as evidenced by quantum pysics)

[Anonymous No.5778407]

>>5778392
>>5778401
>Philosofags who don't understand science, talking about science

Yea, I'm sure learning about Kant's categorical imperative leads to inventing microchips.

lol losers.

[Anonymous No.5778411]

"Philosophy will become obsolete. It will be a very small footnote at the bottom of the scientific method that whispers, "Only linguistics and no objectivity." -- Aristotle.

[Anonymous No.5778413]

>>5778333
>But to answer your question Philosophy will never be as important as Science. Any self absorbed teenager can learn philosophy.

You could use the same polemics against science
Anyone can prove that 2+2 = 4

[Anonymous No.5778417]

>>5778406
>you can't know nuffin

Yea, that attitude gets things done that's for sure. lol useless worm.

[Anonymous No.5778418]

>>5778411
>fake quote
>Prof. Mike "Meme-Man" Tyson

[Anonymous No.5778429]

>>5778417
>lol useless worm.

You're being very philosophical here bro, might want to be a bit more objective

[Anonymous No.5778433]

>>5778385
But legal philosophy is one of the only area where science has nearly no say. Even deterrence arguments go way beyond data and statistic in arguing for stricter or looser penal laws.

[Anonymous No.5778435]

>>5777667
>judging philosophy through a capitalist lens

[Anonymous No.5778436]

>>5778433
Science
B
T
F
O

[Anonymous No.5778439]

>>5778435
>blame capitalism that I study something as useless and outdated as medieval medicine.

Keep paying for that tuition peon.

[Anonymous No.5778441]

>>5778433
>But legal philosophy is one of the only area where science has nearly no say. Even deterrence arguments go way beyond data and statistic in arguing for stricter or looser penal laws.

>parrot squawking professors who make up shit
>the post

You're desperate.

[manginus !!6P/WhzicJTl No.5778452]

>>5778333
philosophy is not merely a fun hobby. if you apply yourself to it seriously, its essentially training for improving your capacity for thinking. you get things like:
-thinking with more clarity
-learning to more efficiently apply different perspectives, switch between perspectives, consider different perspectives simultaneously
-improve your grasp of subtleties and nuances in thought
-thinking with depth, or examining the surface layer of a problem
-applying metaphors
-etc etc

any scientist good benefit from philosophical training

[Anonymous No.5778456]

>Science
>Desperately trying to influence any real-world structures and institutions
>cant sustain itself, funding cut at every corner
>is now basically owned by Big Corporations and used for their purposes

>g-guys global w-warming is bad
>p-pls listen
>w-we are scientists pls

meanwhile
>Philosophy
>basically birthed western culture
>inspiration for the greatest pieces of art
>completely independent from regular power structures or corporations

[Anonymous No.5778459]

Philosophy is useful in that it poses questions. Some can be answered by science, (what causes the tides) some are irrelevant to science (how should a young man of good family comport himself at court), some are unaddressable (what is the nature of man?) Still useful as jumping off points and to provide perspectives.

[Anonymous No.5778460]

>>5778452

[Anonymous No.5778465]

>>5778460
being ironically pathetic is still pathetic

[Anonymous No.5778466]

>>5778452
nawl, im prety sure straightforward black and white absolute reductionist thought is the best thing for my autistic brane

[Anonymous No.5778468]

>>5778456
>>5778459
Wait, are you guys actually serious? I'm laughing at you guys.

[Anonymous No.5778471]

>>5778468
science in full damage control mode

[manginus !!6P/WhzicJTl No.5778472]

>>5778466
could be the case.

[Anonymous No.5778477]

>>5778439
>implying

I just have an appreciation for things outside my area of interest, something I rarely see from students of STEM.

[Anonymous No.5778485]

Science gives us understanding of our physical world and from it often abundance and technology. Philosophy gives us ways to look at and interpret the world we know from scientific observation. Practically science trumps philosophy, nobody can argue that point. We will always need science, philosophy comes and goes in terms of importance to humans.

For instance the man just admitted to A&E following a traffic accident absolutely NEEDS the knowledge science has provided to be treated, however he (and the doctor) does not need, in his current state, to think about why he is receiving this treatment, from whom, where, how and in what context, all that matters is saving his life.

That is not to say that philosophy is useless, far from it; though if you are wondering why then you probably simply haven't read or understood enough philosophy. It can be of great comfort and personal gain to understand philosophy, just as it can be materially and intellectually rewarding to understand and do science.

[Anonymous No.5778487]

Why would you submit yourself to the rules of science if not for philosophical reasons?

[Anonymous No.5778494]

>>5778366
My major was Finance.

[Anonymous No.5778497]

>>5778471
lol you sure showed me!

I look forward to your papers about dogma and non-logic and your lack of ingenuity to ever create anything useful to mankind--all the while dissing science on the internet and a computer, which wouldn't exist at all without the scientific method.

Have fun being a literal social parasite desperately arguing his value to society, and failing.

[Anonymous No.5778498]

>>5778497
And what might your great accomplishments be?

[Anonymous No.5778501]

Isn't it hilarious how philosophy majors have been trained to defend "philosophy" (i.e. their useless majors)?

Everyone in this thread has a bad case of parrot squawking their professors' bad illogical argument for the "value and importance of philosophy in our contemporary times".

hahahahahha it's just sad.

[Anonymous No.5778502]

>>5778497
Why do you assume im studying Philosophy? (I'm not)

>Have fun being a literal social parasite desperately arguing his value to society, and failing.

Sounds exactly like what you are doing with your thread

[Anonymous No.5778504]

>>5778498
I write good poetry.

[Anonymous No.5778514]

>>5778502
>Nuh uh! I know you are but what am I?!?

The Greeks were always about the truth. You're about being a cognitively dissonant faggot--much like a brainwashed religiousfag.

[Anonymous No.5778515]

If any of you knew anything this thread wouldn't exist.

[manginus !!6P/WhzicJTl No.5778516]

>>5778501
i saw that show it was pretty good

[Anonymous No.5778527]

>>5778501
>Isn't it hilarious how philosophy majors have been trained to defend "philosophy" (i.e. their useless majors)?
Well with such a high chance of unemployment it's understandable.
It's even more hilarious that STEM majors have to make fun of philosophy majors - which is both pointless and childish.
Why kick a man when he is lying down?

[Anonymous No.5778531]

>>5778515
Luckily, you're on /lit/. Everyone is dumb.

[Anonymous No.5778533]

>>5778497
Define utility.

[Anonymous No.5778537]

>>5778531
Don't forget pretentious.

[Anonymous No.5778555]

how long until we can report these threads?

[Anonymous No.5778567]

Science is the graphics,
Philosophy is the plot,
Art is the gameplay,

[Anonymous No.5778592]

>>5778527
>Why kick a man when he is lying down?
Because the man who is down is extremely annoying--he won't shut up about his useless knowledge in obsolete epidemiologists, won't stop shit posting on //lit/, and won't stop contributing to the degeneracy of western art and thought.

These people are worms that fester and decay western culture.

[Anonymous No.5778594]

>>5778592
>epistomologies*

[Anonymous No.5778600]

>>5777667
http://youtu.be/gvOcjzQ32Fw?t=11m23s

[Anonymous No.5778606]

>>5778594
>pasta*

[Anonymous No.5778623]

I'll never understant this obsession with "usefulness", as if "usefulness" is a actual set of rules carved in stone by god.


Really STEMfags, what is USEFULNESS?

[Anonymous No.5778651]

>>5777667
philosophy is the art of questioning,
science is the means of which you can find answers.

if philosophy wasn't useful, would Harvart, Yale, Oxford and many others even had it on its program?

[Anonymous No.5778659]

>>5778623
do you think The Philosopher's Stone is a rock?
if you are all so intelligent, get with the program!
The Bible is written as on of the most high literature books ever, that is why it is still alive.

[Anonymous No.5778662]

>>5778651
Gee wiz, for a bunch of philosophers, you guys sure do make a lot of logical fallacies.

Could it be that you're stupid brain dead hedonists who desperate wanted to go to college to waste money, get wasted, and get laid?

hahahhahahahahahahahahha losers.

[Anonymous No.5778680]

>>5778662
nah, I get laid because I know how to tread a lady, can make a good conversation on about any topic on a level that chicks are actually are willing to listen and respect the fact that at the end of the day, they'll talk to grandma, who is religious, and hopes deep down I am a man of faith. That's called being on top of the game called: "Get yourself a girl."

If you talk about physics, they just look at your wallet, if it is smaller then her breasts, she will just take a hike.

[Anonymous No.5778682]

>>5778662
Using that image should, in itself, be considered an appeal to authority

[Anonymous No.5778696]

>>5778682
It is.

[Anonymous No.5778855]

Niether are important in the end

[Anonymous No.5778900]

>>5777667

Philosophy concerns itself with questions such as, "Is life worth living? If so, how should it be lived?"

aka questions that "science" will never be able to adequately answer.

[Anonymous No.5778967]

>>5778900
/lit/ doesn't seem to understand that the two aren't even related in some regards even if science did evolve from philosophy.

[Anonymous No.5778968]

Science doesn't think

[Anonymous No.5779004]

>>5778392
Are you the same guy who wrote this:

>The problem is that you think that modern science is philosophy. It is philosophy, but it is very degraded philosophy that has a very unhealthy fetish for mathematics. Subatomic particles and blackholes are fairy tales, except fairy tales are often more edifying than subatomic particles and blackhole because they mention moral and aesthetic truths, whereas subatomic particles and blackhole are miserable conjectures. The thing with modern science is that they have an excessive hatred for ideas and an excessive love for mathematical demonstrations; which means that any shit idea can gain ascendancy if it's accompanied with enough mathematical witchery.

>Look at the concept of "matter" for example and see how the scientist's concept of it is quite dull and undeveloped.

[Anonymous No.5779010]

>>5778456
I'm not even a STEMfag but this is just retarded.

[Anonymous No.5779013]

>Science answers HOW
>Philosophy WHY

[Anonymous No.5779014]

>all these STEMies getting butthurt because Philosophy has surpassed the rigor of Science
>mfw.

pic related, it's how Philosophy is done today.

[Anonymous No.5779026]

>>5779014
I'd assume most of these posts were trolling if it wasn't for the sheer volume of binary thinking STEMfags. Philosophy and Science are not the same thing and are not aimed at the same goals. Yeezus Christ.

[Anonymous No.5779028]

>>5779026
Better yet, they have EVOLVED to serve different purposes.

[Anonymous No.5779039]

>>5778196
Bait

[Anonymous No.5779041]

>>5777667
Picture is how i see the world every day... a daydreamers curse. I will never be normal.

[Anonymous No.5779056]

>>5778362
Philosophy gave birth to science.
Science became a thing in the west only, the land of philosophy.
It gave birth to concepts of a legal state, justice, ethics and things such as constitutions.
It isn't a competition. They do different things.
You are fucking dumb.

[Anonymous No.5779059]

>>5778372
I explained and you don't know anything about how history worked or how laws are made.
It's like you are trying to be fucking retarded.

[Anonymous No.5779083]

>>5778417
>YOU CANNOT EVEN KNOW THAT YOU CANNOT KNOW NUTHIN
but suckrates did

[Anonymous No.5779095]

>>5779083
>suckrates
heh, good one. howsabout a sci-five!

[Anonymous No.5779096]

>>5779083
maybe he was wrong

[Anonymous No.5779131]

>>5777667

[Anonymous No.5779191]

>>5777667
the biggest joke of all might just be, that to efficiently use one science, you have to use other sciences as well.

[Anonymous No.5779221]

>Has science left philosophy obsolete?

In a sense, yes. Science gives us temporal answers to questions about the physical world that are both useful and far more objective that philosophical reasoning. In the begining of philosophy, one of its main goals was to search for absolute truths, and science is a much better aproach to that. However, i still think that philosophy can tell us something about the world that science cant (I will tell toy what answering your last question)

>Are people still doing philosophy?

Yes. You can split Contemporary philosophy in 4 categories:

1. Ethics and political philosophy
2. Metaphysics
3. Logic and philosophy of language
4. Epistemology and philosophy of science

>What can philosophy do?

1. Philosophy can teach us how we should live our lives. Not in an objective way, but it can still inspire us to be better people and lead better lives. This is something science cant do.

2. Phenomenology can tell us what a phenomenon "is like", rather than what is is. Read Heidegger, some of his ideas are actually "proven" by science in the last few years. Science can tell us what a human being is made of and how we function on a physical level, but not what its like to be human. This has no practical use, exept learning more about ourselves.

Source:

http://www.wired.com/2010/03/heidegger-tools/

3. Logic can help us see what follows from our beliefs.

Science is much more useful than philosophy, every rational modern philosopher will agree. So what? People still do philosophy and find it useful for themselves.

Sorry about my bad english, i am norwegian.

[Anonymous No.5779222]

I always say "I will never fly rockets, but i will give reason to those that do."

That is the purpose of philosophy.

[Anonymous No.5779378]

>>5777667
The utility of science is only in engineering. And is there any truly beneficial engineering or science in practice besides medicine?

The only improvements in the standards of living occurring as a result of or corresponding to the industrial revolution are in convenience and health. People live longer and staying alive takes less physical work.

Medicine is the only science that is actually useful for any purpose other than increasing the convenience of things. I'm not saying "boo science" by this. No -ology has ever been.

Usefulness is not the end goal of life.

[Anonymous No.5779471]

philosophy is the decision about what is valuable. Scientific progress is in the process of being reevaluated. It might be better to have a healthy planet where we all may work the soil than consumerism in which life is empty and worthless and free time is a problem we solve by mocking one another on the Internet.

[Anonymous No.5779502]

Wow. So even /lit/ is nothing but faggotry and shitting at each other?

Why would anyone argue that either practical science or pure reason are obsolete or useless? What about moral thinking is in any way at odds with empirical observation of the forces of the universe?

[Anonymous No.5779539]

>>5779502
>completely ignored a number of posts giving good explanations what they do and why are both still around

[Anonymous No.5779548]

>>5779539
If a house is on fire you don't talk about how the tiles in the bathroom look nice.

[Anonymous No.5779588]

If someone would talk with correctness about the exact sciences, one would be called intelligent.
When one speaks with the art of philosophy, one is considered intellectual, which overrule intelligence.

[Anonymous No.5779659]

I love how easy it is to cut through the bullshit of philolosofags. Every philosophy major in this thread is pretty much saying

>I don't actually study anything important, but with a little bit of obfuscation, semantics, rhetoric, and sophism, I can desperately try to convince you that I do. Please don't call attention to the fact that I do not use a shred of logic, and that I objectively contribute literally nothing to the benefit of man--yet I reap all the benefits scientists have done for man while I shit on them and their ilk.

WOW that is quite a feat of cognitive dissonance. Are philosophy majors are cult? They seem to behave exactly like a cult.

[Anonymous No.5779671]

>>5779502
>complains about a thread
>gives the same argument as other people in the thread

[Anonymous No.5779693]

>>5779659
Haha you sound angry

[Anonymous No.5779694]

>>5779014
Where is this from?

[Anonymous No.5779750]

>>5779659
it sure looks like there is something really important to learn in philosophy, otherwise no-one would go this far to blackmail it

[Anonymous No.5779814]

I study philosophy because I like it.

[Anonymous No.5779884]

I think philosophy still has its place in modern time

The problem is the amount of philosophy majors being created

[Anonymous No.5779914]

>>5778600
English is not my native language so can someone who'se it is, kindly check this video from 11:42 and tell me what the interviewer asks?

I exactly want to know what my homeboy Russell thinks :/

[Anonymous No.5779940]

>>5779694
probably russell or some other complete analytic autist

[Anonymous No.5780035]

>>5779914
Please guys... I cant make out what he says..
I swear to god I'll take this to bumb limit to find out.

[Anonymous No.5780093]

>>5780035
It deals with questions science can't at present deal with, science is not by itself adequate. Secondly, it makes people modest, intellectually and aware a great many things, thought certain, turn out to be untrue There is no shortcut to knowledge. Nothing much else

[Anonymous No.5780097]

>>5777667
There would be no progress without philosophy
Science is inherently dependent on philosophy because all incarnations of science are built on philosophical assumptions

[Anonymous No.5780111]

>>5780093
I was only asking what the interviewer asked at 11:43 but could after countless replays make out that he asks ''But could you summarize the value of philosophy'' But I thought he said muddish instead of modest, so thank you for that. Damn, I'm dumb.

[Anonymous No.5780300]

>>5778404
>Science has become more important than philosophy ever will be.

And that proves that it did not stem from philosophy how...?

[Anonymous No.5780692]

The funniest thing about these threads and their real life occurences is that always people are claiming science as the creme de la creme of advancement and the purpose of life. While these faggots don't know shit about science, it's methodology, the scope, the assumptions.
It's become a buzzword, a new religion fed by the mass media: the glory of 'science'.
Science is created directly through Philosophy and still gets influenced massively by it. Science can't find out everything we want to know. Wittgenstein himself said that if we looked at all that we could know surely through empirical science and logic is but a small amount of what there is to know.
Science is a process of incremental research that create paradigms of knowledge which may or may not be true. It has a lot of problems like the induction problem, research method problem, fraud problem and groupthink.
Science is one of our means as mankind to progress, not the absolute mean nor end.
But most of you probably work at burger king and believe in science because the free internet mediasites you check has so much science progress articles.

[Anonymous No.5780722]

>>5778497
>scientific method
Created and influenced by philosophers
>computer
Is based on logic axioms and other logical concepts which would be impossible without philosophy

You don't know shit, but claim a lot

[Anonymous No.5780853]

Philosophy is never apparent in its current form. It is only after it has left its mark and man has moved on that it reveals itself to us.

Sure, many of us can see it now, but the lense is blurry and the proof is not there. Globalism, Capitalism, and intercontetivity are now what we call philosophy.

Philosophy is not written about, but it is lived out by millions of people mashing various philosophies they come in contact with into their own interpretation of the world. In the past word spread slow, but with schools, organized government education, media, the internet, etc influences are mixed.

Playing games like Civilization awaken you to the reality that is influential crossovers in society.

[Anonymous No.5781622]

>>5777667
Philosophy is to Science what the neanderthal is to the modern man, a mere stepping stone that may have helped, though inadequately, to contribute in reaching the land of modern science.
What use does that step have now that we have reached our destination. Who cares if some nostalgic individuals go back and jump around on that step, we who have no intention of going back to neanderthal land have no need of that step; grateful we are to that step for bringing us here but not delusional to believe it still holds relevance in this land of science today.

[Anonymous No.5781665]

>>5779013
No, Science answers both.

[Anonymous No.5781685]

Properly defined, philosophy is extremely useful and not at all an outdated field. If we define "philosophy" as meaning the five fields of study, Metaphysics, Epistemology, Ethics, Politics, and Aesthetics, then obviously those aren't outdated. They are still being studied, still being refined, and still being debated to this day. Not only that, but its relatively easy to point to concrete benefits that have come from these five fields, especially Politics and Ethics [which we use in our daily lives] and Epistemology [which provides the foundation for science and protects the methodology "Can't no nuff"].

The problem is that "philosophy" nowadays has a million and one definitions, and anyone who says anything "profound" is said to be philosophizing.

It doesn't help that philosophy is more of an Art than a Science [in the old sense of those terms. The End philosophical fields seek is generally in plain view, but the Means are variant and ever-evolving], and thus has become a den of would-be intellectuals who enjoy sprouting ideas that don't need to be backed up.

[Anonymous No.5781706]

>>5781685
protects the methodology FROM "Can't no nuffin"

[Anonymous No.5781707]

>>5780722
Greek scientists and mathematicians were the first philosophers. So technically, philosophy was created by mathematicians and scientiats.

[Anonymous No.5781717]

Put it this way, Science is the superior version of Philosophy. Philosophy is the inferior version of science, a proto-science.

[Anonymous No.5781720]

>>5777667
Scientific answers raise philosophical questions.

[Anonymous No.5781724]

>>5777667
Hi, I know you think this is 1978 and things are just really all a-changin', but this conversation has been going on for a long time and it has regularly come up in the academy for the last 50 years. Science is adapting but the problem is that it doesn't really answer any questions about why something works, nor does it offer anything totalizing (other than the scientific method durrrr) for people looking to understand and believe in the world. The mind body problem is probably the best western example of how and why phil and sci are different.

[Anonymous No.5781728]

>>5777667
this is how it works you plebs
god>maths>analytic philosophy>science>muh feels philosophy>rest

[Anonymous No.5781733]

>>5781728
math is founded on ideas from analytic philosophy.

[Anonymous No.5781739]

ITT:

>dumb niggas still comparing philosophy and science like they serve the same ends

Is /lit/ really this stupid?

[Anonymous No.5781742]

>>5781724

Explain how how-questions differ from why-questions and what extra information why-questions provide

[Anonymous No.5781747]

>>5781728

>god
>not part of muh feels philosophy

[Anonymous No.5781748]

>>5781739
Yeah

[Anonymous No.5781825]

>>5781733
Yeah, mathematicians invented analytic philosophy.

[Anonymous No.5781879]

>>5778401
Then what is engineering?

[Anonymous No.5782070]

>>5777667
Philosophy will never become obsolete as long as we have societal problems.
Science an philosophy might actually be yin and yang

[Anonymous No.5782073]

>>5782070
Science resolves societal problems, philosophy does not.

[Anonymous No.5782079]

>>5777667
science tells us what we can do
philosophy asks whether we should do it

[Anonymous No.5782080]

>>5782073
Maybe
But it also creates societal problems that it cannot solve, which are solved by philosophy.

[Anonymous No.5782096]

>>5782080
Example?

[Anonymous No.5782106]

>>5782096
what is progress?

[Paradise !!vh7XQhHe/pR No.5782113]

THAT PICTURE IN OP IS REALLY COOL, BUT THIS THREAD IS UNDOUBTEDLY BAD

[Anonymous No.5782115]

>>5782106
I meant an example of a societal problem Philosophy has solved.

[Anonymous No.5782120]

>>5782096
Sorry I abandoned thread for a sec took a fat shit.
A good example actually began within the last few years. Current technology isolates people. Social interaction is now learned in two ways. Online and irl. We could use philosophy to determine weather or not this is a problem, and maybe even to go about solving it. How that?

[Anonymous No.5782121]

>>5778662
Philosophy is a rigorous major, people who go to college to party are in communications or sociology or some shit

[Anonymous No.5782123]

>>5782115
The problem of weather or not we should use atomic weapons.

[Anonymous No.5782131]

Philosophy can be broken up roughly into:
1. Logic
2. Epistemology
3. Ethics
4. Metaphysics
5.Aesthetics
6. Political

Logic is a formal science.

Epistemology: Logic+Scientific Method destroys any doubt in our knowledge.

Ethics has been solved by neuroscience and evolutionary biology, we can quantify pleasure and pain and determine rules to maximise the former. Resolved.

Metaphysics: Work in progress, see Theoretical Physics (String Theory related developments in particular).

Aesthetics: Symmetry (Mathematics), Pleasure (Biology). Resolved.

Political: We may set our political/social goals as axioms and then determine the best system of rules to reach those goals. Why those goals? Well you chose them. Resolved.

Philosophy is dead.

[Anonymous No.5782133]

>>5782131
Spoken like a true autist.

[Anonymous No.5782134]

>>5782123
Game Theory resolved that one buddy.

[Anonymous No.5782137]

>>5782120
>We could use philosophy to determine weather or not this is a problem, and maybe even to go about solving it.
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

[Paradise !!vh7XQhHe/pR No.5782141]

Philosophy is the human soul, my friends. You might think of it as the beginning; before we specialised. Everyone was a philosopher. Now philosophy has branched out into a bunch of other fields - psychology, politics, science, etc. - and some of those fields are for people with autism lol, the end.

Seriously though, academic philosophy isn't up to squat, but this whole 'philosophy is dead' deal is still just autismal angst. No harm in a bit of old wisdom, dudes.

[Anonymous No.5782142]

>>5782134
That's a form of philosophy.
But here, imagine that advanced technology was somehow creating problems in society today. Science would be unable to solve these problems, sense further technological growth would only perpetuate these problems. The only savior would have to be philosophy.

[Anonymous No.5782144]

>>5782137
Whats so funny retard

[Anonymous No.5782146]

>>5782133
Bitter continental detected

[Anonymous No.5782149]

>>5782142
>somehow creating problems

How much did you pay for your philosophy degree? Does Philosophy help you get rid of that debt?

[Anonymous No.5782151]

>>5782141
I think there's still a place for pure philosophy and we may need it in the near future.

[Anonymous No.5782155]

>>5782141
>Implying Philosophers are not more autistic on average than Physicists.

[Paradise !!vh7XQhHe/pR No.5782158]

>>5782151
I think people should be taught about what it is to be human at a far earlier age, rather than going straight to filling them up with Christianity and the purely mechanical qualities needed in industry.

[Paradise !!vh7XQhHe/pR No.5782160]

>>5782155
In fairness, everyone is pretty fucking autistic lol

[Anonymous No.5782163]

>>5782144
philosophy has never 'determined' or 'solved' anything. Anything that could be written on the topic of online / offline communication with a normative perspective would be made of personal opinion, cultural background, prejudice, non sequitur, and so on. There are potentially interesting points to be made about digital communication, but we don't need 'philosophy' for that.

[Anonymous No.5782169]

Only a jackass would think this is a valid question.

[Paradise !!vh7XQhHe/pR No.5782170]

>>5782158
>Christianity
And dinosaurs, mind you.

[Anonymous No.5782174]

>>5782149
Dude I'm 18.
Everyone knows this stuff is fucking us up bad.

[Paradise !!vh7XQhHe/pR No.5782175]

What we teach our kids in elementary school:
-basic arithmetic
-basic languages
-Christianity
-dinosaurs

[Paradise !!vh7XQhHe/pR No.5782178]

>>5782175
And we wonder why scientists can be so autistic...

[Anonymous No.5782181]

>>5782163
I think philosophy is just what we need for that. Maybe you just don't have a good idea about hat philosophy is.

[Anonymous No.5782191]

>>5782158
Sure but don't get off track. I think we could do some good by teaching philosophy in school. And with that, hopefully people can learn a bit about what it means to be human

[Anonymous No.5782193]

>>5782175
Whose teaching Christianity?

[Paradise !!vh7XQhHe/pR No.5782194]

>>5782191
I agree. I do. I have nothing against people studying philosophy, in fact I encourage it. Numbers are cold and empty, just a petty means to control dinosaurs.

[Paradise !!vh7XQhHe/pR No.5782197]

>>5782193
Well we got indoctrinated like fuck into Christianity anyway, I was an alter boy until I got my first black eye and couldn't serve, then fell into the abyss

[Anonymous No.5782198]

>devolving into a Christianity debate

This thread gets worse and worse.

[Paradise !!vh7XQhHe/pR No.5782200]

>>5782198
No, you just have autism

[Anonymous No.5782201]

>>5782194
>Has not realised how cold and empty humans are.

[Anonymous No.5782202]

Linguist here, a-are our s-STEM overlords going to put me on trial t-too?

[Anonymous No.5782203]

>>5782163
I think you could find a lot of hard info that supports the idea that online communication and, more generally, a high presence of advance technology is impacting us negatively. And if that were to be brought up, I would turn to philosophy to solve it.

[Paradise !!vh7XQhHe/pR No.5782209]

>>5782201
I surely have, though, anon. Those fuckers shouldn't have taught us about dinosaurs and volcanoes so early.

[Anonymous No.5782212]

>>5782203
You can't 'solve' anything about that. You can use 'philosophy' to drone on about what you personally think qualifies as 'negative', but no one gives a fuck.

[Anonymous No.5782216]

>>5782197
Ah. Don't make this a personal issue man. If being more human is the goal, it would actually make more sense to teach a wide variety of religions, including Christianity, to children. Coupled with philosophy, this could be a great thing. Dino's are gay thou

[Paradise !!vh7XQhHe/pR No.5782221]

>>5782216
I think there needs to be more than religion. Religion can be just another frightening thing. An empty order that one must fall into lest the be crushed (hell). I think we need to teach soul.

[Anonymous No.5782227]

>>5782212
Sure. After all, negative is completely subjective. So it should just be ignored.

[Anonymous No.5782238]

>>5782212
What one personally see as negative, assuming ones philosophy is logical, must be negative in one way or another.
Once this is determined philosophy can be used to go about resolving the issue.

[Anonymous No.5782251]

>>5782238
>>5782227
You've never actually read any philosophy, right?

[Anonymous No.5782254]

>>5782251
How would this prove me wrong?

[Anonymous No.5782279]

>>5782221
If we taught many religions while backing none of them, kids may find soul on their own

[Paradise !!vh7XQhHe/pR No.5782282]

>>5782279
I doubt it. There's no personality there, only threats.

[Paradise !!vh7XQhHe/pR No.5782286]

>>5782282
We should teach something like humanism and anthropological authors should stop writing so cryptically

[Anonymous No.5782289]

>>5782282
But if you support none of them as truth, then the threats become imaginary. Kids may even begin to take the teachings metaphorically

[Anonymous No.5782290]

>>5778407
Technology without moral philosophy hasn't exactly given us Utopia either

[Anonymous No.5782295]

>>5782290
They are yin and yang my friend

[Paradise !!vh7XQhHe/pR No.5782297]

>>5782289
People are way too autistic for that, dude. Dude banishing people to hell? Can't go over there, those dudes blow themselves up and mutilate women's genitals. Etc. etc. You know? We're born empty and filled up with murder.

[Anonymous No.5782299]

>>5778439
>being this caught up in capitalist ideology not even ironically

[Paradise !!vh7XQhHe/pR No.5782302]

>>5782297
Ralph Ellison correctly captures the mentality we're inculcated into with his Invisible Man - that scene with the electrified mat and the money on it, the beaten black protagonist having to give the speech to the insane white man, the poor girl with the terror in her eyes. That was a good fucking book, for what I read of it. Just that one scene, all I needed.

[Anonymous No.5782306]

>>5778592
>not realizing the scourge is yourself
You really have no clue, do you? Here's a hint, it's not philosophy that's allowing itself to become instrumentalized in the capitalist domination of the world

[Anonymous No.5782509]

>>5778370

And consciousness created both scientific thought and philosophy.

And we'll probably loose scientific thought one day too when we become near ethereal information beings seamlessly connected into all of reality itself. Consciousness will most likely be removed also, once the invalidity of emotion and feels becomes nothing but a hindrance.

In other words what's your fucking point captain obvious?

[Anonymous No.5782555]

>>5782306
i just want to say that i'm glad someone's bothering, there are 5 other posters probably just thinking it isn't worth their time
godspeed tovarisch

[Anonymous No.5782567]

Science is a branch of philosophy.

[Anonymous No.5782670]

>>5782567
So?

[Anonymous No.5782674]

>>5782670
Science can't leave philosophy obsolete because science is philosophy

[Anonymous No.5782988]

>>5782567
Who decided this?

[Anonymous No.5783090]

Why does philosophy need to be useful to be valuable? Since when is value tied to practical use and nothing else?

[anon-act No.5783101]

philosophy is thinking outside the box to use inside the box, philosophers understand that religion is philosiphy for retards.

[anon-act No.5783124]

>>5783090
does not need to be functional, must be liberating

[anon-act No.5783145]

>>5778413
2+2= 5
now that's philosophy

[Anonymous No.5783159]

>>5777667

My reply is a little late but nonetheless....

Science simply consists of asking questions. Philosophy serves to ensure we ask the right questions.

[Anonymous No.5783166]

>>5778362
>No one ever benefited from philosophy
being this new to the world

[Anonymous No.5783171]

>>5783159
>the right questions
So what experiment is going to tell us which questions are right? thought experiments are philosophy

[anon-act No.5783174]

higgs boson is faster than light, MY phlosophy tels me, it is not faster than light, higgs,boson, jumps to a higher energy level when going "faster than light", just goes to a higher dimension that supports energylevels causing speeds like that, But that's just my useless philosophy

[Anonymous No.5783180]

>>5783145
>now that's philosophy
you misspelled "tautologically false"

[Anonymous No.5783197]

Philosophy will always be relevant, though science will lead to the death of certain schools of thought (while also offering grounds for new debate). For instance, recent developments in biology have lead to considerable proof of deterministic values, but the evidence of stochastic processes in the body also provides a certain degree of evidence against determinism (though not necessarily in favor of free-will). Stuff like this provides the ground-work for new schools of philosophical thought, which furthers understanding and leads to more optimized human cognitive function. When we can understand the world around us more concretely, this leads to a more streamlined cognitive process.

However, I firmly believe Science has killed the purpose of modern religion. Nietzche's "god is dead" quote is based on this idea actually, and he makes a good argument why it's up to modern philosophy to redefine morality. Because of this, philosophy isn't obsolete in the modern world, at least not until someone can find a valid way to define morality on a universal scale.

[Anonymous No.5783200]

>>5782509
>once the invalidity of emotion and feels becomes nothing but a hindrance.
>hindrance
>implying there's a goal
>actually thinking your independently derived purpose for the universe is objectively true and not standing on a foundation of "but my feelings!"
where did all of these fucking dumbass teenagers come from to converge on this thread?

[Anonymous No.5783206]

If science is philosophy, how come philosophers don't work in labs?

Checkmate philosophy majors.

[Anonymous No.5783215]

[Anonymous No.5783220]

>>5783215

[Anonymous No.5783234]

>>5778533
STEMfags on this thread so philosophically illiterate they can't even understand that their posts are meaningless rambling

>b-but, my degree lets me [insert obliviously dogmatic defense]

[Anonymous No.5783254]

>>5779659
>b-but my stem major h-helps people

[Anonymous No.5783271]

>>5778176
what the fuck category of philosophy is this who's scholars didn't learn not to play word games during their first semester of highschool philosophy

what the actual fuck do you think you're talking about?

[Anonymous No.5783280]

>>5783174
>t-this is what philosophy means r-right?

[Anonymous No.5783293]

>>5783220
>>5783215
more like this

[Anonymous No.5783301]

STEM observes and evaluates, the humanities interpret and imagine.

A good scientist has to be at least a decent philosopher, a good philosopher needs a solid STEM foundation. I think if you focus too much on your perspective of things without looking around a little, your work will not be valuable.

That being said it's easier to defend people studying STEM because in STEM, you have a large group of people contributing to the big ass body of theory that is the world's STEM knowledge; since it all follows a common method everything can be integrated. Philosophy follows trends, so you'll have a small number of people leading the debate and the rest just sits and ogles them. There's a reason there's no "philosophy industry": there's not really that much work to do.

[Anonymous No.5784052]

>>5778176
You've just been reading too much Derrida mate.

[Anonymous No.5784062]

>>5778390
> I don't understand what philosophy is

[Anonymous No.5784196]

>>5778390
having no clue that the only reason his computer can do most of what it can is thanks to Russell and Whitehead's Principia Mathematica

[Anonymous No.5784212]

this
>>5778429
why are all of the sciencefags on this thread completely oblivious to how unscientific the shit they're spouting is

[Anonymous No.5784224]

>>5784052
That's Wittgenstein more than anything