/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.11148475]

>REEE Science has assumptions behind it, it is part of philosophy!
>Ok Humanitiesfag, I agree. But in the absence of empirical verification or pure deduction, why should I care about your philosophical system over another one? Or even over a 5 year old's system?
>REEEEE SHUTUP SHUTUP SHUTUP! NEVER QUESTION ACADEMIC FASHIONS! REEE
>Sorry to have hurt your feelings Humanitiesfag, I am truly sorry. Let me ask you another question. Why do you use currently accepted science as a platform for your own unfalsifiable extrapolations while saying you don't accept the importance of scientific method and observation? You implicitly are, when you use the latest Physics results as a platform for your own musings, though if you want a lesson on Quantum Mechanics, I'd be happy to help. You clearly misuse it. Obviously you can be sceptical of the scientific method and observation, they can ultimately never be "proven to be the true reality" but they have given us results that accord with the standards of sensory data, which we humans find important in everyday life.
>REEEEEEEEEEEEEE! I DON'T NEED ADVICE FROM BIRDS TO BE A PHILOSOPHERS OF BIRDS! STOP ASKING QUESTIONS! MY DIALECTIC EXPLAINS THE RUMINATIONS OF LATE CAPITALISM, JUST DON'T ASK ME TO PREDICT ANYTHKNG! REEEEEEEEEEEEEE!

[The best scientific mind No.11148488]

>>11148475
>REEE Science has assumptions behind it, it is part of philosophy!
Actually philsophy is just a special science.

[Anonymous No.11148494]

>it's a STEMfag can't understand or engage with thought that isn't arid and trivial episode

its all so tiresome

[Anonymous No.11148502]

>>11148494
based

[Anonymous No.11148503]

>>11148475
What directs scientific inquiry most, intuition or institution?

[Anonymous No.11148514]

>>11148503
your mom's sweet pussy

[Anonymous No.11148517]

>>11148475
Hahaha humanitiesfags BTFO

[Anonymous No.11148520]

>>11148475
He cute

[Anonymous No.11148521]

>>11148475
I agree with you entirely. Where is this quoted from though?

[Anonymous No.11148526]

If we are so advanced in science why are so many people depressed and unable to find meaning in life?

[The best scientific mind No.11148528]

>>11148503
Let me ask, hold up for me to email the GUYS on my thesis committee and see what they think.

[Anonymous No.11148534]

>>11148475
post is too tryhard for tuxpepe

[Anonymous No.11148535]

>>11148528
You can't just ask people for their motivation, they lie and don't even know it.

[Anonymous No.11148547]

>>11148475
Memes and philosophizing aside, the annoying thing about modern glorification of “science” is they think it’s a monolithic infallible entity. Without even getting into philosophy, scientific researchers are human just like anyone else and can just be plain lazy, stupid, and short-sighted. Statistics can be manipulated to back up one’s hypothesis, the methodology of studies can be subtly flawed, and scientists can feel privileged to talk about stuff they don’t really know about because of the glamor associated with having gotten a phd and written some articles which got into a scientific journal. Not to mention the influence that business, government funding, and public opinion can have on scientific research (or lack thereof). Finally, putting things in a wrong paradigm can make otherwise sound data be used to support false conclusions, or just discount other data. It’s for reasons like these that extrasensory perception, for instance — something with data to back it up — is discounted by mainstream science. It doesn’t fit into strictly materialistic paradigms, sounds too kooky, etc. Scientists think their rationalism and materialism is objective and correct, but this itself shows a heavy bias and unwillingness to really see where the data leads you.

[Anonymous No.11148563]

>>11148475
>engage my autism

[Anonymous No.11148578]

>>11148503
Business. Money.

[Anonymous No.11148580]

>>11148475
I can't even tell who this is supposed to mock anymore