/sci/ - Science & Math

>>9322101
>When your former secretary honoured me by asking me to read a paper to your society, my first thought was that I would certainly do it and my second thought was that if I was to have the opportunity to speak to you I should speak about something which I am keen on communicating to you and that I should not misuse this opportunity to give you a lecture about, say, logic. I call this a misuse, for to explain a scientific matter to you it would need a course of lectures and not an hour's paper. Another alternative would have been to give you what's called a popular scientific lecture, that is a lecture intended to make you believe that you understand a thing which actually you don't understand, and to gratify what I believe to be one of the lowest desires of modern people, namely the superficial curiosity about the latest discoveries of science.

Wittgenstein, A lecture on ethics

>>9013929
kys

What does /sci/ think about philosophy?

Which philosophers does /sci/ approve of?

>>7039396
Not him, but a word's meaning is in its use not some nuftie's definition.

>>6993262
Subjective experience is an unfalsifiable proposition.

Imagine there was a circuit in the brain solely responsible for giving us our sense of subjective experience. Without this circuit, we become p-zombies. Now imagine after years of searching, neuroscientists come across this circuit by chance and try deactivating it in a test subject. When deactivated, the patient acts completely normally, and since his lack of subjective experience is the ONLY thing that's different, his memory is functioning just fine. Then, when they flip the circuit back on, he can recall everything that has happened when he was a p-zombie. The neuroscientists therefore have no reason to suspect the circuit of doing anything.

And in case you think his memories wouldn't be recorded, or they'd be lacking somehow, then the neuroscientists would just attribute this circuit to somehow messing with memory and nothing else (because that's all that they have evidence for).

Now you see how ridiculous this is?

>>6977217
A word.