Philosophy is dead

Discussion in 'General Philosophy' started by arfa brane, Aug 13, 2011.

  1. Rav Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,422
    I wouldn't agree with that, and I feel reasonably certain that a large number of scientists (perhaps most) wouldn't agree with it either. Philosophical inquiry might be out of place when it comes to the application of the scientific method, but it is certainly relevant when it comes to discussion about the methodology itself, the results that it produces and indeed the reasons for applying it in the first place.
     
    Last edited: Aug 13, 2011
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Me-Ki-Gal Banned Banned

    Messages:
    4,634
    your a great guy james . you give me hope when the day is done. i definitely agree with your post . very well put .

    the indigenous peoples you live around . do you have any interactions with there culture . the rainbow serpent intrigues me . it seem to be a world wide theme . I am thinking they are close to the root of human migration being relatively a puddle jump away from the source. Behaviors have to have the coding from the beginnings in there rituals . I believe that . I heard one time Australia had the oldest rocks that stick out of the ground on the planet . Is that true ? Like maybe it is the remnants of Pangaea? I don't know wild guessing is my forte. That is what happens when your a wild man
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. wynn ˙ Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    15,058
    Well, if the physicists go and jump off a bridge, then everyone else should too!!
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. arfa brane call me arf Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,832
    I'd delay that choice, if I were a physicist.
     
  8. Mind Over Matter Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,205
    Philosophy encompasses many branches of knowledge, including science, law, logic, mathematics, epistemology, ethics, politics, aesthetics, history, etc. Each of these branches of knowledge has some elements of a philosophical foundation.

    The human ability to reason creates many tools.

    Reason creates logic.
    Reason and logic created math.
    Math is a tool that science uses.
    Human reason also created philosophy.
    Historically, philosophy and science where developed together.
    In the last 300-400 years, they sometimes go their own ways, sometimes.
     
    Last edited: Sep 4, 2011
  9. Mind Over Matter Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,205
    If a philosopher and a scientist saw a rock...

    The philosopher would say: "I wonder why this rock is here?"
    The scientist would say: "I wonder how this rock got here?"
     
  10. peterk301 Registered Member

    Messages:
    21
    This is so twisted: "Philosophy has not kept up with modern developments in science." ALL of philosophy?? WHO said that PHYSICS is the one true understanding for all matters that concern ontology, metaphysics, epistemology, and most of all, ETHICS?
     
  11. decons scrambled egg Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    144
    If anything, physics and other sciences are still trying to keep up with philosophy.

    The notions of reality and existence owe their whole fame to ancient philosophical sentimentality. Even religions were constructed as practical fillings to philosophical gaps. When the paths of religion and science cross today, it is because science comes with new answers to the questions that religion claims to cover.

    When the scientists try to learn the components of the universe, or imagine finding intelligent life across the universe, or decode DNA, they are still struggling with the old questions.

    Science provides the tools that philosophy deserve, the strongest tools that human mind can come up with.
     
  12. Telemachus Rex Protesting Mod Stupidity Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    249
    I think Hawking is wrong in that: (A) many philosophers do keep up on modern science (at least at high level for a non-specialist), even though there are many more that simply ignore it and (B) he incorrectly circumscribes the universe of questions philosophers deal with to the sorts he is interested in: the nature and meaning of the universe.

    If you want to argue about certain topics like free will or the origins of ethics within the human mind, you had better know some science or be prepared to be thought a fool. Both of those topics require some understanding of how the human brain works for the discussion of them to be complete. If you want to argue about the nature of existence, you should know some physics, for similar reasons.

    That said, there are many areas that can be discussed on which science offers no guidance. Traditional questions about justice, fairness, epistemology and theology remain largely outside the realm of science (with certain exceptions for various sub-arguments). It's possible that science will encroach on all those as well, in time, but it hasn't quite chased the philosophers from the field yet.

    Still, Hawking's view is understandable. No doubt countless people want him to address philosophical points on which he has some insight, and he probably often finds people clinging to philosophical ideas that are out of touch with science. In sort, people go to Stephen Hawking and ask his thoughts on where the universe came from, but no one ever asks him "what is justice?" Plus, we all tend to view our fields of expertise as somewhat more important than they probably truly are.

    Here's two people going at it on that basis: physics vs neurobiology:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V_TQea0aOnE
     
  13. Pineal Banned Banned

    Messages:
    846
    I guess if Hawking presents a solid philosophical argument for why his assertion is correct we will have no choice but to accept this self-contradictory act on his part for what it is.
     
  14. raydpratt Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    89
    Philosophers and logicians used to be the same people, but as logic became more symbolic and form was valued over substance, philosophers became detritus and logicians became mathematicians. It would probably be difficult to get a good philosophical conversation out of a logician these days. Please forgive me, but for the wonder of his intelligence and success in the face of devastating infirmaties, Hawking is boring. I do not dislike him, and I admire him, but he is boring.
     
  15. kx000 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,134
    I do not agree, it is inevitable that one day we will find there was a man out there who knew everything by his own reasoning. Basically, science is behind. The greatest ideas have already been thought of (God), it is science that can't prove God. I can prove God, watch. God is real, and he told me so, if you disagree ask him yourself.
     
  16. Dywyddyr Penguinaciously duckalicious. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    19,252
    Inevitable? And how do you arrive at this ridiculous conclusion?

    Basically, you're ignorant.

    Supposition.

    Science doesn't need to. Or want to.

    No you can't.

    I did, he said you're an idiot and we're not to listen to anything you say.
     
  17. kx000 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,134
    I asked, He said your are lying and to avoid the inevitable argument that will arise from this.
     
  18. NMSquirrel OCD ADHD THC IMO UR12 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,478
    he told me you both need to be spanked..
     
  19. keith1 Guest

    If Hawking really said the above quote, then he is showing one of his crippled aspects. Philosophy is the mother of Science.
    A child will always dream he can kill his mother, when done with her teet. The caring mother just goes away and observes from the crack shadows*.

    * (NO... I, Mom, nor Philosophy, are on crack)
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 7, 2011
  20. wellwisher Banned Banned

    Messages:
    5,160
    One of the main problems I see between the spirit of philosophy and spirit of science is too much of science has opted for the science casino approach to reality. Philosophy is more like an old fahion sober rational approach to reality. All the science casino approach requires is material resources (money) and less brain power (pull the lever) to win a science jackpot.

    The science casino approach is based on the gambling casino. This is a world of gaming machines, probability and odds where outcomes are not subject to reason, but emotions and hunches. All you got to do is put enough money into the slot manchine and pull the lever and out will pop jackpots every now and then.

    Some of the science casino games are more like craps and blackjack where the odds are better and math systems can be used to win more frequently. Logic and reason is like card counting, where a logical restraint is placed on odds and chaos, but like in any casino, this is frowned upon. If you constrain chaos with reason, this spoils the illusion.

    Einstein say, he did not believe God would play dice with the universe. He did not like the impending science casino mentality that was forming in science. He was more old school age of reason (casinos can become addictive and can attract shady people). E=MC2 was not about empirical gambling at the craps table. it was sober and rational.

    In the land of casinos, a god of chaos rules, with the house/chaos winning in the end. If you lose in a science casino you get to blame chaos for this. Although this approach is easier, I don't like its addictive behavior even if some jackpots are won all the time. Since this is not based on logic, but chance, the conceptual foundations of science become defective, since you need logic as much a spending money.
     
  21. Dywyddyr Penguinaciously duckalicious. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    19,252
    More bullshit.
     
  22. keith1 Guest

    Craps-n-crackers.
     
  23. Me-Ki-Gal Banned Banned

    Messages:
    4,634
    Your right !! Distribution what do you think of that . A fucked up mess aye.

    Disturbing is right. I finally figured out something dat been hunting me for so long . God=Mob The mob rule controls destiny . Conformity is the name of the game . Your punished if you don't .

    This is what caused human nature to change " The written word" It is the biggest of things that ever happened to mankind . That is what separated Humans from there displaced nature. I keep thinking why King David was so bad by numbering the peoples . Now I think it was the mobs rebellion for being pegged . Like now fuck every body knows every body . I can't believe how you can just narrow right in on my house with the touch of "Google God"
    Blows my fucking mind . Then throw in that you can hear every word I say by the vibration on My window and what the fuck do we have " Nakedness" WE are once again "Naked" as the question was brought to our attention .
    So the Banners you fly represent you. Banners on Hills so to speak . You are engaged by having "Names" in the nakedness conclusions are drawn by your banners
    The Mob ultimately sets the rules . Leaders try to figure a way to pacify the Mob( slaves of society that owe in the U.S. 45000 or there about plus there kids not born yet, we are fucked in the game of monetary gain . I don't like that game . Pokers more fun . I can walk away if I am losing ). Do you that Stand with Me understand that ? You rule the day and in Peace victory will be yours . Lucy is right !


    My protest is " Being born into slavery " What would I do about it ? Make a way for my son to rule the day. I bored him into kingship . Like hypnosis really , bring on the pleasantness of a woman's voice. It gets them every time . Lulled into submission by submissive tactics . Like Water!!!

    I was going to say something else . I don't know what happen . Oh for the slave to rise and set his son free from bondage. That is what it is all about . My son works his way to kingship because I make path for him to run . All good parents would do the same . What else is there ? All animals need to run . That is the nature of being human if you ask Me
     
    Last edited: Oct 7, 2011

Share This Page