/lit/ - Literature

Science is the child of philosophy. The scientific method is a great tool, one that has done a lot to further our understanding and standards of living. It lets us create a human-understandable model of reality and how it is "operating", and not much else outside of that.
No matter how much you dislike it, you are not some operator looking objectively into a world. You are a part of this world. You have developed a model using the scientific method, good! Now how will you use that knowledge? What is the best ethical outcome if this model involves human life? How do we decide the model is "good" or even "true"? How do we communicate that model, convince people of its efficacy, and why do we do it the ways we do? Is the model "beautiful"? Why do we prefer it over other models? What does the model say about our reality? How and why do we even categorize these randoms things that we monkeys do as "science" and "philosophy"? These are all questions rooted in philosophy.
>It's impossible to shake the impression that philosophy students have an insane amount of hubris that comes from a deep ignorance of scientific developments. If you understood even 1% of the results found on the last 80 years you would probably never be able to read a philosophy book again and take it seriously.
why are you so scared of different ways of thinking? Does it hurt your ego? Not everyone can be a scientist. There's a million ways we wouldn't be here if that was the case. Maybe reading some philosophy will give you a new perspective and therefore help you do science, knowledge is all no?
Not sure why I spent so much time replying to a intentionally inflammatory post.

t. STEM student

Bertrand "King Cuck" Russell

Are there any analytic philosophers who have tried to deconstruct and criticize Hegel in a serious manner?