/sci/ - Science & Math

Heidegger was a nazi. What's there not to grasp?

>implying even people in philosophy can comprehend Heidegger

i can agree with that

but whats funny is the further you get from philosophy down the "applied" scale, the more money you make, and the more people give a fuck

/r/ing that pic if anyone knows what im rambling about

i'd apply some existentialism and phenomenology to her

... if you know what i mean

The troll thread density seems to be higher than normal.

>>3341038

>PhD in applied philosophy
>Any dick I want
>300k sperm cells starting

>implying 99.9% of the greatest minds ever to be born can comprehend Heidegger

>>3341060
>implying 99.9% of the world even gives a fuck or knows who this guy is without having just checked wikipedia and bursting into treats from boredom

>>3341128
>bursting into treats
sounds yummy

>>3341060

>implying there is anything in Heidegger to comprehend

>>3341038

Reminded me of this.

Science is not philosophy. Philosophy search a truth, whereas science is a huge pragmatical "as if". Science is about theory and supposition, philisophy is about finding some truth.

Philosophy is a joke.

>>3341018
>And that even 99.9% of the greatest minds on /sci/ would have extreme difficulty in grasping say the likes of Heidegger?

Certainly. 99.9% of people in general would have extreme difficulty in grasping the likes of Heidegger. I don't think that ratio improves in the aspie neckbeard population.

>>3342424
That's a high level trolling, sir !

Heidegger was a backtracking fool who couldn't keep his invented vocabulary straight. I also didn't understand 3/4 of it.

philosophy requires more intelligence than any hard science

prove me wrong

>>3343077
>Heidegger was a brilliant luminary, but I couldn't keep his invented vocabulary straight so I didn't understand 3/4 of it.

Fixed for you!

>>3344450
ok
intelligence has no true objective measure
so who is widely attributed to be the most intelligent person to live?
Einstein a physicist
done

prove me wrong

Ugh Heidegger. So many made up terms that aren't defined. That is not profound, that's called being obtuse and nebulous. You invent some bullshit concept, and then say it's a feeling, a tendency, an orientation, something like X. You never get around to saying what it IS exactly, you just dance around the question with ponderous bullshit. Anybody can do that. That has nothing to do with science.

>>3344514
>That has nothing to do with science.

Probably a good thing he wrote volumes on philosophy then.

>>3344489
i hate philosofags, mainly because it just seems pointless to me, but im positive ive read in several places that some old philosopher is considered to be the most intelligent man to ever live

gimme 10-20 minutes and ill try to cite it

philosophy is a bunch of guys who get together and participate in a pissing contest to see who can come up with the most intelligent macroscopic interpretation of a phenomenon

physicists stand on the shoulders of an extensive history of discovery, experimentation, and mathematical reasoning to reach heights at the astronomical and the quantum scales.

frankly it doesn't matter if the philosopher is more intelligent than the physicist(although it is worth noting that the philosopher is definitely not smart enough to realize he has wasted his vast intellect on philosophy [/opinion]) because as is evidenced by our own history physics will continuously produce results and new physical understanding while philosophy wonders whether understanding is even possible

Science is systematically provable philosophy. Science if falsifiable. Philosophy provides questions and perspectives, science provides answers. Also if you think that "hurr durr philosophy is harder" constitutes an argument of any sort, then you're not only a pretentious faggot, but also, wait for it, bad at philosophy. It's easier to explain how orbits work than it is to explain good refutations of hyperbolic skepticism. One of these stimulates half-baked debates among roommates, the other puts satellites into fucking space. Shut up and stop making these threads.

>>3344530
You're thinking of a poet. I too forgot who.

>>3344530
David Hume?

>>3344538
>wait 16 hours to tell op to shut up

what a fucking pussy

>>3344563
kind of ironic if it is since his subscription to empiricism probably would have made him a physicist/chemist/mathematician had he lived in a different time

>>3344542

No you're mistaken. You're thinking of a fictional character, but the name has also slipped my mind.

>>3344538
you and I should have sex

Jesus fucking christ on his buttfucking imaginary cross /sci/,

Many of the most gifted intellects in science, math, and philosophy alive RIGHT NOW would agree that Heidegger has in some way shaped their work and own personal philosophies. The rest probably can't get over the Nazi crap.

But apparently you are more qualified to critique him after following the /sci/ self study guide and enrolling in community college in Skoalspit TX.

>>3344640

Damn right we are! faggot

>>3344640

you saying /sci/ is dumb or something retard? just because 95% of ppl here cant solve quadratics doesnt mean they arent experts on string theory

u mad

You guys realize that PhD stands for Philosophy doctor right? So in essence OP is correct.

from wiki "Philosophy is the study of general and fundamental problems, such as those connected with existence, knowledge, values, reason, mind, and language"

So yes. But no Heidegger fails at life.

>>3344670
I don't see where "philosophy" stands for "makes you able to build an iPad"
/thread

>>3344489
Einstein was undoubtedly very intelligent, however, we can only make vague guesses at his IQ or the IQ of great minds before him. And then there's the entire can of worms on how accurate IQ really is.

If he is the greatest in one person's mind, fine, opinions are opinions no matter how ill conceived they may be.

But to state it as irrefutable fact doesn't make you an opinionated layman or a scientist, just an idiot that likely also tries to retroactively diagnose great thinkers of the past with autism to feel better about himself.

>>3344683
>he thinks scientists would bother with something as pathetic as electrical engineering

laughing RA cocksluts.gif

>>3344670
you really believe the majority on folks on /sci/ are educated or have any hopes of ever obtaining a phd in anything?

>>3344879
well, some do. philosophers don't.
u mad?

All science is actually philosophy. That, however, doesn't mean all philosophy is science.
Get it right kids.

no. we aren't all fascists. ok, so i claim to be part of that .1%? you sound like a dummie. nice tits tho.