/lit/ - Literature

Like all science, it'll be disproved, forgotten, ridiculed and laughed at within 30 years.

It's not.

philosophy is science.

hah, you thought this would give you serious results!

>>2765954
Guesswork, obscurantist bullshit, bare assertion (i.e. philosophy) != science.

>>2765953
I was just reminded of /lit/ while watching a movie, actually.

>>2765958

>>2765958
And Continental philosophy != philosophy.

what anime is this?

>>2765946

>>2765982
Boku no Pico
From Up On Poppy Hill

>>2765946
Nothing can be proved with science. Things can only be disproved. Read some epistemology if you genuinely think science is "better" than philosophy.

>>2765958
>>2765975

>tfw != is a philosophical construct

Hahah! Your thread is filled with philosophy

Even your question is based on a philosophic opinion.

Culture with philosophy but without technology = Greek/Roman Empire and Renaissance. Our civilization's golden age of culture.

Culture with technology but without philosophy = Today. Justin Bieber, Jackass 3D and cancer.

>>2766003
>Then
Mass starvation and famine, primary entertainment is watching animals eat slaves
>Now
Universal literacy, live expectancy doubled

Science > Philosophy

>>2766008
>life expectancy doubled
>quality of life is just as shitty

>>2766003
>Greek/Roman Empire and Renaissance
>without technology
Что я читаю?

>>2766008
>Then
Mass starvation and famine, primary entertainment is watching animals eat slaves
>Now
Mass starvation and famine, primary entertainment is war and masturbation

>>2765997
are you drunk?

>>2766017
>Mass starvation and famine
>now
The apes in Africa don't count.

>>2766008
>Universal literacy

Amazon best seller list right now:
1. Fifty Shades of Grey: Book One of the Fifty Shades Trilogy
2. Fifty Shades Trilogy: Fifty Shades of Grey, Fifty Shades Darker, Fifty Shades Freed 3-volume Boxed Set
3. Fifty Shades Darker (Fifty Shades, Book 2)
4. Fifty Shades Freed: Book Three of the Fifty Shades Trilogy
5. Gone Girl: A Novel
6. Unintended Consequences: Why Everything You've Been Told About the Economy Is Wrong
7. Mockingjay (The Hunger Games, Book 3)
8. A Song of Ice and Fire, Books 1-4 (A Game of Thrones / A Feast for Crows / A Storm of Swords / Clash of Kings)
9. The Hunger Games
10. Catching Fire (The Hunger Games, Book 2)

Not listed: Literature, history, philosophy.

>>2766031
>oh no people know how to read and read shitty things
>clearly this means people cannot read
So dumb.

Like >>2765997 said, science hasn't really proved anything.
Math is the superior field, seeing how its the only one where you can actually have any certainty at all.

>>2766020
yesi still think i'm right

>>2766043
I agree.

Math > science > * > philosophy.

>>2766043
>This meta-construct is equivalent to this meta-construct. Eureka!

Both are worthless.

>>2766047
>says something is better than something else without quantifying what exactly it is better at doing
At least if you'd studied philosophy you'd know how to think.

>>2766038
I'd rather have a handful of good philosophers than 6 billion people reading garbage.

>>2765954

Advanced science is philosophy anyway because it's theoretical.

>>2766063
Vous m'avez mal compris; vous êtes idiot.

Philosophy creates insight (factually wrong or right, doesn't matter)
Science rationalizes it and proves it.

>>2766069
Go to bed.

>>2766071
Where'd you read that, the back of a cereal box?

>>2766068

Science asks how.
Philosophy asks why.

Both are fundamental to our society, yet one is clearly lacking these days.

>>2766075
No, I just wrote it.

What kind of fucked up cereal do they sell where you come from.

>>2766003
>Culture with philosophy but without technology = Greek/Roman Empire and Renaissance. Our civilization's golden age of culture.
Greek and romans without technology. Is this nigga serious!?

>Culture with technology but without philosophy = Today. Justin Bieber, Jackass 3D and cancer.
And particle acellerators. And apollo project. And a shitload of artificial satellites scanning every inch of this goddamned earth. And water on Mars.

Shut up, science has a very strong impact in the material world. However, science is not independent from philosophy. Much on the contrary. Science with her contraints, can only follow philosophy from a "safe distance".

>>2766073
I'm secretly a tripfag. Guess which one, analyticbro.

>>2766078
corn pops recently released a box with a comic depicting a cat vaporizing a cinnamon stick with laser vision which sent the cinnamon's few remains flying onto the corn pop who is now coated in cinnamon and traumatized by his friend's death. And thats how we got cinnamon corn pops. They were actually pretty tasty

>>2766070
>implying most scientists aren't deeply concerned with philosophy and have strong insights before they go out testing.

This is not the first industrial revolution anymore, kiddo.

>>2766080
>And particle acellerators. And apollo project. And a shitload of artificial satellites scanning every inch of this goddamned earth. And water on Mars.

Yeah, none of that is culture or in any way shape or form makes us better individuals. In the 'best' case scenario, they give us commodities. In the worst case scenario, weaponry.

>>2766081
That one who's an obnoxious attention whore?

>>2766083
Another childhood ruined.

>>2766084

not that guy but

>Kant's conception of time and space was validated by Einstein's 150 years later

PHILOSOPHY >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> science

>>2766084
>>2766092
Who are you quoting?

>>2766093
sadnietzsche.swf
That answer couldn't have possibly been wrong.

>>2766071
>Science asks how.
>Philosophy asks why.

Extreme bullshit. Both philosophy and science ask "how" and "why" questions.

examples off the top of my head:
Science
>Why do things fall down?
>HOW do things fall down?

Philosophy
>How was the world created?
>Why was life granted to living beings?

>>2766104
That last question is super tautological.

>>2766096
>Philosophy is full of a bunch of people asserting a whole bunch of shit with no evidence.
>Out of all the shit that is asserted with no evidence, some of it is later demonstrated to be true.
>Philosophers act like they're soothsayers because of this.
You guys are no better than economists.

>>2766113
>Philosophy is full of a bunch of people asserting a whole bunch of shit with no evidence.
>Out of all the shit that is asserted with no evidence, some of it is later demonstrated to be true.
>Philosophers act like they're soothsayers because of this.

Ahum
>theoretical physics

>>2766104
>hurr durr science asks when was the universe created
>hurrr durrr philosophy asks where the soul is located

STOP BEING DENSE RETARD

>>2766092
For those who have the mind to understand the work of science, it creates deeply perceptive human beings. The fault lies on the quality of the humans generated, not on the work of science. I profoundly agree with you when you say that a society merely based on materialistic science is fundamentally void of meaning and destined to failure, but to deny the incredible power of science is sheer ignorance.

>>2766097
It should be obvious. Go attention whore somewhere else.

>>2766096
"validated"

>>2766115
pic related

>>2766117
I agree. I wasn't putting down science. I was defending philosophy.

>>2766112
>Why does beauty impress human beings?
Could that be a valid replacement, perhaps?

>you will never see the majesty of the Temple of Rosy Cross

>>2766124

Please tell me what on earth that picture is from.

>>2766133
Got it on /b/ ages ago. No idea.

>>2766130
I could make the same argument, but then I would just be a punk.
You know, that "beauty" is what impresses humans, so that's why it does.

>>2766140
Wie bitte?

>>2766142
Have I confused you somehow? Does something need clarification?

>You know, that "beauty" is what impresses humans, so that's why it does.
I can't get any meaning from this. What retarded rule did you use for punctuation?

>>2766133
I think it's pokemon.

That is a stupid question OP
Philosophy is a science. In classical terms it is the first science.

>>2766156
The question was:
>Why does beauty impress human beings?
My facetious response, rephrased, was:
>I could argue that beauty IS that which impresses human beings, which would make the question just as tautological as the one it would be replacing.

Please stop making me explain my shitty joke.

>>2766166
I still don't get what's the point in all you're saying.

>>2766171
shut up

>>2766174
Are you judging me?