/sci/ - Science & Math

>>6010544
Too pussy for philosophers who actually contributed to scientific thought?

So people are into Khanacademy and the like. Are resources like http://tartarus.org/gareth/maths/notes/ particuarly helpful do you think?

/sci/ I have to ask you something. Philosophy - has it become obsolete in the modern world? What does it do? Why do we need Zizek, Derrida, Lacan?

Back in the day Isaac Newton called himself - "a natural philosopher" - today he would be called a physicist.

Todays philosophers are more like sociologists and ethic/moral philosophers with a communist bias.

>>4480413
When isn't it?

Question to discuss:
You could attach prices to thoughts. Some cost a lot, some a little. And how does one pay for thoughts?

Stranger 1 has disconnected

>Philosophy is word games
>my face when I agree

A good number of the supposedly "deep" and "fundamental" philosophical questions either come from a misunderstanding of language or are just nonsense.

For example, the answer of the question "If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?" is strongly dependent on your definition of the word "sound". If you interpret "sound" to mean something like "pressure waves propagating in air", then yes, it does make a sound. Otherwise, if "sound" means to you "the sensation created by the reception of pressure waves propagating in air", then no, it doesn't make a sound.