positivism

[Anonymous No.13018022]

the fuck is this philosophy that i keep hearing about? is it even right? what books about it should i read

[Anonymous No.13018036]

>>13018022
positivism is basically the only cogent "philosophic" stance left.

obviously Auguste Comte's "A General View of Positivism" would be the place to start

[Anonymous No.13018465]

>>13018036
the worst image of all time?

[Anonymous No.13018687]

You should read this then

[Anonymous No.13018701]

>>13018465
yes

[Anonymous No.13018715]

Dont do it. Itll turn you gay desu

[Anonymous No.13018725]

>>13018465
>being this fragile
lol.

[Anonymous No.13018740]

>>13018725
>anyone who has an opinion that isn't mine is fragile

[Anonymous No.13018752]

>>13018022
Comte is reddit, the philosopher. It’s “I f*cking love science,” and he tried to start a religion where his followers would tap daily on the regions of their skulls where the cutting edge research in Phrenology had proven that altruism originates.

[Anonymous No.13018756]

>>13018022

Basically, it asserts that ethics and metaphysics (mostly metaphysics) is irrelevant and trite because everything you can reason about is scientifically demonstrable, be it logically or empirically. It fell short many times over after several people demonstrated that things like the structure of Mathematics can't be self consistent and also Popper's principle of falseability being applied to the empirical sciences, doing away with the notion of definitive explanations to phenomena and more or less ridding science of the need to close the is/ought gap.

But of course, if even the Talmud still gets read today, there are still positivists going about. You'll find most of them clapping to Dawkins, Krauss, Harris or some other pop sci author who thinks Philosophy in general is useless and that the almighty science can and will eventually explain out everything there is to explain. Those folks are the most likely to be drawn by bad statistics and also the most likely to believe that morality is better reduced to optimization problems so that they can finally get to run over children with their self driving Tesla.

Read Comte OP, the original source, and also Durkhein who greatly contributed to establishing a sociological positivism. But then when hopefully you are not convinced that you should think like this, also read Quine and Popper so that you can move beyond the circular thinking.

[Anonymous No.13019388]

you think Carnap and those guys (let alone modern analytics) even read people like Comte? (Penso di no.)

[Anonymous No.13019738]

>>13018036
Positivism disproves itself in the preambles. It's litteraly the metaphysical philosophy of How all metaphysical philosophies are false.
Pure brainlet central.