/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.14841704]

> Philosophy is just as important as sciences!

[Anonymous No.14841713]

>>14841704
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4PLvdmifDSk

[Anonymous No.14841722]

>>14841713
It has been proven that biologically people are born with a moral praxis

even monkeys do and they don't need your faggot branches about why the epistemology of niggerism or whatever

[Anonymous No.14841723]

>>14841704
Based. We shouldn't care about the illusion of phenomena that the sciences study. Only the One is worthy of our attention.

[Anonymous No.14841724]

>>14841704

[Anonymous No.14841725]

>>14841722

[Anonymous No.14841729]

>>14841725

[Anonymous No.14841730]

>>14841704
Ecology and evolutionary biology would be near pointless exercises in data collection if it weren’t for relatively recent philosophical arguments but go off.

[Anonymous No.14841732]

>>14841704
NOW WOT?

[Anonymous No.14841750]

>>14841722
spooked

[Anonymous No.14841755]

>>14841730
>l-life would be meaningless, w-what do you mean you can have objectives and life without knowing about the works of Szymankowszczyzna or ivan ivanovich ivanovsky, thats not legal!!!

cope

[Anonymous No.14841756]

>>14841704
>”important”
>vague criticism of philosophy
nigga u wat

[Anonymous No.14841760]

>>14841732
THEN WOT

[Anonymous No.14841783]

>>14841704
Yeah, obviously philosophy is more important, since it provides epistemological grounds for science. Indeed it is laughable to think otherwise

[Anonymous No.14841848]

>>14841783
Please elaborate on the philosophy that has successfully succeded in epistemologically grounding science

[Anonymous No.14841861]

>>14841848
the scientific method

[Anonymous No.14841884]

>>14841848
Literally empiricism, scientific method. read history dweeb.

[Anonymous No.14841890]

>>14841848
arent you some STEM kid? dont they require you to take classes on this or did you opt out for banking or something?

[Anonymous No.14841921]

>>14841848
hermeticism

[Anonymous No.14842111]

duh

[Anonymous No.14842156]

ethics boards are needed to approve of certain projects or experiments. So without even considering the scientific method, empiricism, etc that others have elaborated on, we need some type of discussion on whether or not we are gonna be like the Chinese and genetically modify babies. That's why we have ethics panels you mong

[Anonymous No.14842186]

>>14841848
Science literally went from the Baconian Method to Popper's falsification model to Bayesian induction you pseud.

[Anonymous No.14842192]

>>14841723
This.

[Anonymous No.14842198]

Philosophy shouldn't be taken seriously unless its treated as a science

[Anonymous No.14842342]

>>14841704
The unexamined life is not worth living.

[Anonymous No.14842364]

>>14841704
>Mathematics isn't philosophy
Normie detected

[Anonymous No.14842390]

>>14841704
Naturalism's axiomatic assumptions
All scientific study inescapably builds on at least some essential assumptions that are untested by scientific processes.[42][43] Kuhn concurs that all science is based on an approved agenda of unprovable assumptions about the character of the universe, rather than merely on empirical facts. These assumptions—a paradigm—comprise a collection of beliefs, values and techniques that are held by a given scientific community, which legitimize their systems and set the limitations to their investigation.[44] For naturalists, nature is the only reality, the only paradigm. There is no such thing as 'supernatural'. The scientific method is to be used to investigate all reality.[45]

Naturalism is the implicit philosophy of working scientists.[46] The following basic assumptions are needed to justify the scientific method.[47]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_science#Current_approaches

[Anonymous No.14842399]

>>14841704
Yes.

[Anonymous No.14842418]

>>14841861
>>14841884
Define “the scientific method”

[Anonymous No.14842432]

>>14841704
literature is overall a complete waste of time. we should only read science text books and historical works to understand processes. all fiction, literature, etc is just really a waste of time.

[Anonymous No.14842462]

>>14842198
Agreed.... And it is a science if done rigorously. The logic employed by philosophy is abstracted from from consistent relations in our experience (in other words, it ultimately relies upon empiricism just like the rest of science).

[Anonymous No.14842475]

>>14842432
posting on 4chan is a waste of time, go back.

[Anonymous No.14842639]

>>14841704
honesty supposed science is irrelevant. what's important is rethinking and reframing. truths come out then, whether they be scientific or philosophical, and save a lot of time. most likely every paradigm that dominates a given science will need to be reevaluated (philosophically-informed) to get anywhere much further. you can see the limits of narrow thinking in pretty much every science. hard sciences are better only by their rigour and strictly limited subject matter, but they suffer the same fate.

[Anonymous No.14842648]

Fuck science

[Anonymous No.14842656]

>>14841722
>even monkeys do
not really. monkeys are incredibly selfish and manipulative like all animals. it's social strategy. humans have the ability to rise beyond this through conscientiousness. of course, most are little better than the monkey.

[Anonymous No.14843673]

>>14842656
Fucking kek. Monkeys and great apes have complex moral systems and while we cannot definitively determine scientifically that it isn't just "social strategy" you can't do so with humans either. Thinking that humans are the only creatures capable of moral behavior is effectively denying evolution. If there were not moral systems present in our evolutionary ancestors we wouldn't have them. Full stop. Darwin noted that every single human quality is not different in kind from animals but only different to the degree at which it is present. Have you read any research on animal cognition and morality? Try out Frans De Waal for starters. I see no reason to believe that an ape cannot act "morally" since they do perform typical human "moral" actions and have been demonstrated to have metacognitive capabilities. In short, stop talking about shit you know nothing about

[Anonymous No.14843695]

>>14843673
le alisdair faec

[Anonymous No.14843717]

>Philosophy is just as important as sciences! After all science is natural philosophy and the two complement each other. Anyone trying to comprehend the universe with only one without the other will inevitably be lost.

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » mxvabIoSIE No.14843724]

>>14841722
>It has been proven that biologically people are born with a moral praxis

no it hasnt dumb nigger

[Anonymous No.14843725]

>>14843717
Cope.

[Anonymous No.14843748]

I don't care, science looks retarded and is retarded.

[Anonymous No.14843761]

>>14841704

Hi I'm self-driving car here would you like to program me with how to handle different scenarios when it comes to preserving human life. No? Okay.

Hey are there hierarchies and relevance and importance when it comes to the, needs, understanding and application of sciences? No? Okay bye.

What? You're trying to disprove the need for philosophy with a philosophical justification? Interesting performative contradiction.

[Anonymous No.14843765]

>>14843673
>all socialisation is selfish and manipulative in all animals capable of it
>humans can recognise this and, at each moment in time, do their best to not be bound by it -- others cannot do the pseudo-3rd person look required for that.
You have dogshit reading comprehension.

[Anonymous No.14843793]

>>14841722
>It has been proven that biologically people are born with a moral praxis

[Anonymous No.14843798]

>Hi I'm self-driving car here would you like to program me with how to handle different scenarios when it comes to preserving human life. No? Okay.
>Hey are there hierarchies and relevance and importance when it comes to the, needs, understanding and application of sciences? No? Okay bye.
>What? You're trying to disprove the need for philosophy with a philosophical justification? Interesting performative contradiction.

[Anonymous No.14843803]

>>14841848
Marxism.

[Anonymous No.14843848]

Is Sagan the best science poet?

[Anonymous No.14843947]

>>14843765
Again, this is assumption and not based on actual research. Sure, it could be true that all altruistic or moral behavior is based in selfishness, but you'd have to go way back in the evolutionary chain. Most of our close relatives exhibit seemingly unselfish altruistic behavior that could only be viewed as selfish if you take into account species propagation and individual safety. Also, monkeys and apes do seem to be capable of "pseudo-3rd person" perspective taking and other metacognitive tasks, again we simply cannot be the first species capable of this. If it wasn't present to some degree in close relatives we wouldn't be able to do it. Research indicates that even distantly related monkeys have (for all intents and purposes) concepts of fairness, equity, etc. Why should we think we can overcome what has been ingrained into us by millions of years of environmental pressure and natural selection? We can't, at least not with logic alone. Maybe try a brain lesion. Eat a dick

[Anonymous No.14843958]

>>14841755
>he thinks the """objectives""" he pursues in modern s*ciety have nothing to do with philosophical systems
Cringe and soulless labor unit pilled

[Anonymous No.14843968]

>>14843798
Basedjak posters should be killed.

[Anonymous No.14843988]

>>14841704
I always thought that science and philosophy should be synonymous. The Presocratics, Aristotle were proto-scientists. Newton still called his main work mathematical principles of natural philosophy. Modernity caused the split but they should be reconciled.

[Anonymous No.14844008]

>Basedjak posters should be killed

[Anonymous No.14844024]

>>14843988
The reason the disciplines split is because philosocucks became irrelevant

[Anonymous No.14844053]

Yes.

[Anonymous No.14844272]

99% of mankind has no use of science. And I dont mean simply professionally, I mean most humans get by just fine because the knowledge of the natural world isn't that appealing to them. Most of us carry on without a care for molecular biology or quantum mechanics. Hell, most scientists care little about science outside of their specific field of interest. Meanwhile philosophical, ideological, socio-political, moral ideas guide the decisions of all brain-abled humans beyond basic survival, so how is philosophy less important, again? Is it because it cannot produce a new smartphone or build a death-ray to employ in mass genocides? I concede, philosophy sucks for that.

[Anonymous No.14845016]

>there is a difference
Cringe

[Anonymous No.14845056]

>>14843968
Eugenics is bad.

[Anonymous No.14845066]

>>14843798
>gets btfo'd
>reposts the message that killed him
Thanks. I would've scrolled past it.

[Anonymous No.14845092]

>>14844272
99.9% of mankind doesn’t care about philosotard larping either though

[Anonymous No.14845104]

I'd rather live happy than knowledgeable

[Anonymous No.14845107]

>Thanks. I would've scrolled past it.

[Anonymous No.14845110]

>>14841704
Wrong.
It's more important.

[Anonymous No.14845112]

>the world is round
when in the fuck am I gonna use this?
>the world sucks
now we can debate this

[Anonymous No.14845197]

>>14841704
OP doesn't seem to see the importance of the law of non-contradiction. Please OP, tell me how your "science" works if X=/=X and Y=/=Y

[Anonymous No.14845457]

>>14843947
>For all intents and purposes
So they don't, but you purposefully falsely portray evidence to support your retarded view point
You haven't provided a single piece of evidence against the social strategy position and neither has anyone, because it's the only one that makes any sort of sense

[Anonymous No.14845636]

>>14841722
>It has been proven that biologically people are born with a moral praxis

[Anonymous No.14845648]

>>14841704
>What is good (why)
OP can't answer it

>>14842390
Based and Urantia pilled

[Anonymous No.14845857]

>>14842432
Everything is objectively a waste of time.

[Anonymous No.14846085]

Humanities>STEM

[Anonymous No.14846189]

>>14843724
whao racist much you stupid mentally ill worthless disgusting embarrassing pathetic fucking tranny?

[Anonymous No.14846338]

>>14845457
I do have evidence you brainless spineless cro-magnon. If you have two brain cells go ahead and read from someone who actually spent his life researching this:

https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=L5n8znkgL9UC&oi=fnd&pg=PA1&dq=frans+de+waal&ots=NobEFGu6_a&sig=Hi64l29JQXP8UGHFiM0jOixxA4w#v=onepage&q=frans%20de%20waal&f=false

[Anonymous No.14846552]

>>14841704
Define "importance"

[Anonymous No.14846611]

>>14843673
>He's a Materialist
Oof yikes cringe unbased.