/sci/ - Science & Math

Make mandatory philosophy classes in science lectures and make sure everyone understands science is a branch of philosophy.

>>8248368
This is how: >>8247793

>>8248368
Stop trying to foolishly make it easy to digest for the masses. Science is complicated, period. No ammount of clever metahpors or stupid skits will help you once you start to go really deep into any field of knowlodge. People need to understand that just because they dont understant something it isnt important or worthy of attention, and scientist need to be free from the commands and whims of scientifically illiterete retards that keep asking for shit like "the cure for cancer" or "flying cars" without understanding what they are actually asking for and their ramifications.

Most philosophers actually are pretty irrelevant nowadays. All questions that can be solved without analyzing massive amounts of information are over.

>left: real scientists
>right: literal memelords

>>8248387
>this is what autists actually believe

>>8248413
Philosotard detected. what are you doing in a science board my useless friend ? :^)

>>8248411
That's exactly the problem here. The right isn't showing the actual research scientists, but popularizes of science.

>>8248428
>how do I become happy?
>just read this epic study :^)

>>8248387
If you, on a daily basis, define your being as a purely scientific series of chemical reactions and drives in reaction to stimuli, you have used philosophy without even knowing it.

>>8248368
IMO Everyone (especially academics) should have some exposure to Plato, Kant, and Wittgenstein.

>>8248442
No philosotard ever got a prize for babbling shit like "I think, therefore I am". Real world belongs to the scientists ;)

>>8248440
>how do I become happy?
ecstacy

>>8248460
Oh babe, you know Descartes gets me hot and bothered, don't you?

>>8248480
butt its true :B

>>8248368
Your picture could as well prove that philosophy went down the shitter in recent history.

>>8248368
Fund studies that test already studied things. We have way too many "cursory studies" that have interesting results that no one repeats because they aren't first and therefore they can't get any funding. I mean look at what happened when they redid landmark psychology experiments and discovered like 85% of them were bunk. No one funds those who double check and we need double, triple and quadruple checking.

>>8248411
thatwasthejoke.jpg

>>8248368
We're entering a new dark age this century. There's nothing to fix, nature will take it's course and higher learning will regain it's intrinsic value eventually.

>>8248368
Fuck me. I hate these goddamn edgy """"""scientists""""""" who take a giant shit on philosophy because they believe science can somehow answer all of our questions. These are the same type of people who visit /r/atheism unironically. Fucking rustles my jimmies.

by being smarter than the pop scientists
by not buying their shit
by thinking for yourself and debunking the crap they spew
but this will never happen because the majority are not too smart. Even if they were, we'd still have the same problem, albeit with more discoveries made.

>>8248508
>it is
gee, dunning krueger in full effect

>>8248512
>they believe science can somehow answer all of our questions
It can't?

>>8248368
>>8248379
>>8248442
I feel like a general "philosophy of science" class could work as a requirement for all science majors. Make it oriented toward writing/evaluating lab reports or something. Better that than forcing them to choose between shit like Nonwestern Religions and Comparative Cultural Studies for a writing credit.

>>8248440
>>how do I become happy?
>mfw

>>8248526
Not my first language, I can never remember if its it's or its.

I did come off as pompous with that claim but I won't refute it. Philosophy is a joke, the academic ecosystem supporting it is dying out due to lack of funding (ie. lack of value) which in turn is a sign of regressive times ahead, our sacking of Bayt al-Hikma, of the Library of Alexandria. Except our philosophers do not have a place to disseminate their wisdom, the whole discipline is as current as phrenology.

>>8248368
>How do we fix science?
How do we fix humans?*

>>8248460
Cogito ergo sum was not Descartes' ultimate answer, nor did he claim it reconciled the problem he was chipping away at.

>>8248460
Descartes separated real from the ideal

>>8248368
I think a lot of the criticism centres around a very specific branch of philosophy - that of postmodernism applied to science. I'm sure that Dawkins and crew would still see the value in other branches of philosophy, practical ethics etc

>>8248566
I don't think this is necessarily true. There are still giants in philosophy: Plantinga, Dennett, and Kripke are still alive. There is very interesting research being done in ontology and philosophy of mind. As the world becomes more technical, the chops emphasized in the analytic schools (especially mathematical logic) will become more important. There's also the fact that people are communicating now more than ever, and this necessitates people skilled in the art of rhetoric.

More 'artsy' philosophy is being disseminated at a ridiculous pace through the media, and this will fuel public interest in such forms of philosophy and represents cultural growth.

The biggest worry is that academic philosophy is becoming too technical and estranged from the pop-philosophy espoused by people like Neil Degrasse Tyson, Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins, and fucking Bill Nye (he's depressingly retarded).

>ancient philosophers were good
>this means modern philosophers are also good

>>8248368
who are the guys on the left? i recognize 1 of them. but on the right i know 2 of them are scientist one does space and the other is about bugs (bill nye)

>>8248616
sage'd

>>8248594
Well, thank you for that, very clearly stated. I should pull my head out of my ass and not get so frustrated with the "pop-philosphers" and their sludge. Pareto principle in effect? You made my day a bit brighter.

>>8248616
You don't belong on this board, sir.

>>8248616
Heisenberg was a businessman, he invented beer

Schrödinger was a biologist, he specialized on felines

Bohr invented the Nordic language that later developed into Swedish, Norwegian, Finish, etc.

>>8248649
wew lad

>>8248368
more math.
heavy math.
for everyone.
even for people in the humanities.

None of these quotes are incompatible, apart from the Bill Nye one.

The Dawkins quotes are unrelated and have been arranged as to imply a context which never existed.

Nobody ITT seems to understand philosophy or science, for that matter.

>>8248368
We stop consuming dross media like a goddamn fire hose.

No offense, but /sci/ falls under this category.

>>8248649

>>8249599
This.

>>8248368
Science isn't broken.

The question you should be asking is "How do we eliminate the scourge that is continental philosophy?"

>>8248512
Envy is not the worst of the Cardinal
Sins, but it is certainly the most ugly.

>>8248431
>The right isn't showing the actual research scientists, but popularizes of science.

Krauss is both

>>8248440
>don't have an argument
>greentext with ironic smiley

>>8249648
He's net stupid nonetheless.

>>8249677
I really hope people don't start overusing :^), I think it's pretty and derive entertainment from every post I suffix with it. Sometimes suffixing with multiple ironic smileys.

>>8249695
pretty funny*

>>8249695
>He's net stupid nonetheless.
How so?

Some scientists may be out of touch with philosophy (also lol @ the examples of present-day "scientists", find someone good at least, like Lee Smolin), but philosophers are even more hugely out of touch with advances in math that resolve many philosophical questions by making them more precise.

>>8249698
It's that strong urge to vomit I get every time i hear him speak

>>8249698
He's fond of pushing his shitty personal philosophy as hard, substantiated science. Ironically, he's a bad, self hating philosopher. It's a real shame, without his internal bias against philosophy (and certain theistic concepts, indirectly) he may be capable of generating something pretty solid and worthwhile.

I'm not even saying he needs to study any philosophical work or meaningfully engage engage with the works of the past whatsoever. He just needs to learn to let go.

>>8248368
kill celebrity scientists who think their opinion on a field not their own matters

>>8249725
Also, this:
>>8249723
The machinery of my mind generates a sensation of disgust when it receives and processes a good deal of his outputs. Especially when he gets together with Dawkins. That dynamic is just on another level.

Stoping forced medication to engeneers would help

>>8249740
Better to just pray the gay away?

>>8249736

What's the problem with Dawkins?

I understand that Krauss espousing his contradictory 'universe from nothing' spiel and talking about the zero energy universe hypothesis as though it were hard fact, is annoying.

>>8249800
Dawkins nets out as fine enough, it's more about their dynamic and what being around fellow anti-theists brings out of him. Making statements like "If On the Origin of Species was biology’s deadliest blow to supernaturalism, we may come to see A Universe from Nothing as the equivalent from cosmology. The title means exactly what it says. And what it says is devastating."

Come on Dawkins. Climb off for a moment, you're embarrassing yourself.

>>8249807
Reminder that we didn't get the LHC in the 90s because of religious nuts

>>8249807

Oh ok, well that's probably resultant of Krauss misinforming him.

I don't really understand the campaign against religion, especially by scientists.

Humans are equipped with a number of cognitive biases and heuristics that result in religious thinking being particularly appealing.

Developing good logical reasoning skills and gaining a thorough scientific education goes a long way to minimizing the effects of said biases, but not everybody is going to be able to do that.

For as long as people remain uneducated, there will be religion.

However, in an ideally educated world it's still likely that some form of theism would persist; due to the feels appeal.

>>8249813
Reminder that the US congress cut funding to construct an accelerator in Texas, after spending 2 billion, so they could divert the money to the space station.

Reminder that the US congress cut funding to Fermi, to waste most of it on foreign imperialism.

Reminder your comment is irrelevant to the topic at hand. No one is saying religion doesn't cause problems.

>>8249817
>Oh ok, well that's probably resultant of Krauss misinforming him.
Almost certainly, and he ate it up because it preyed on an embedded bias.

Otherwise my opinion on this is complex and tends to change over time, usually around how misanthropic I'm feeling. History is full of repeating patterns that make it clear just what the human species as a whole can be expected to handle, and what hierarchical and ideological control structures keep people who are otherwise incapable of thinking properly, in line. It also shows how and why those structures inevitably fail.

Too bad, so sad.

>>8249800
What exactly is wrong with his hypothesis?

>>8249826
(To be clear though, I do wish the human species could, and would, outgrow organized religion. With the right social and cultural structures, and the proper feedback loops, I don't think this is impossible. It's not theism itself that's the problem.)

>>8249826

>Almost certainly, and he ate it up because it preyed on an embedded bias

Indeed, which isn't really acceptable considering he is most definitely intelligent enough to check it out for himself.

>>8248460
Man it really must suck to be you. The only reason you're into science is insecurity.

Do you realize that all of the people on the left of OPs picture would very likely hate you?

>>8249829

The zero energy hypothesis?

Nothing, it's just that it isn't complete and hasn't been verified; therefore, it's not in the same realm as the theories (verified hypotheses) that he tacks it onto.

I like the zero energy universe hypothesis; it's elegant as fuck.

Anyway, the universe from nothing spiel?

A quantum vacuum isn't 'nothing', as he attempts to convince people and he surely knows this.

Not only that, but he is always going on about the energy of a vacuum and how amazing it is that when you remove everything from space it still weighs something.

its contradictory and plainly false.

Other than that, he's a great physicist.

The scientists on the left were educated in the liberal arts their whole life. That included history, philosophy, math and I forgot the other field. Music that's the one. In the second half of the twentieth century education took a nose dive and started cutting the liberal arts for the "vocational" skills. In Europe this is education is still active and scientists and engineers are educated in the liberal arts with their education in science/engineering. A lot of the European engineers I've met are very knowledgeable in philosophy and history. Americans on the other hand only know their little niche. This include the top tier students at the best schools in America. Those who don't read philosophy will never understand the big questions in life. That's how you get inspiration for your research.

>>8249843
It's a real shame when someone working in particle physics doesn't even know who Democritus was, nor the arguments about motion and void that led to it.

Google the Vienna circle.

>>8249849
I never read his work and I might do so now. But too many people don't read anything about the works of their predecessors in philosophy and their field. This lead to research stagnation.

>>8249853
The majority of his works were lost aside from a few pieces here and there, and most of his life was reconstructed from writings of others.

If you read about him, make sure to also read about atomism. Both the east and west created a variant of it, somewhat independently. Buddhists thought reality was composed of granular units that transferred energy, though the associated meaning of most of those things was much different in their cultural context.

>>8249866
Sadly this is like all Greek philosophers. Most of their work was lost. I see his atomism work. He pretty much created the field of atomic theory 2.2k years before the scientists in the 20s started doing experimental work.

>Keeps posting copypasta that has been debunked
>Religiously believes in appeal to authority instead of appeal to objectively varied methodology
>Refuses to stand corrected and improve, which ironically is one of the things that Science itself does

>>8249871
Yep. And unfortunately a large number of people don't realize the mere notion of "atoms", even in a modern context, is a philosophical proposition (as is quantum field theory). They also fail to realize without having an idea to begin with, you can't go about experimentally verifying it while converging on an accurate model.

>>8249900
We can't never see atoms. We just think of the idea of it and hope this is what it is.

>>8249874
good image, thx

kill the popsci cancer.

Michio and Black Science Man were cool until they started being the popular go to scientist for all sciencey questions.

Celebrate scientists for their actual work.

>>8249900
They were pretty far from inferring or confirming any properties atoms back then, desu.

>>8250634
>We can't never see atoms. We just think of the idea of it and hope this is what it is.
Is this 2003?

>>8248368
Eliminate humanity

>>8250861

There is a great bit DeGrasse talks about. He expressed concern himself that he was the go-to person for any science question, especially when it was not anything in his field. He actually refuses to comment and will redirect journalists to proper scientists of that field to ask questions.

>>8250926
Shit got pretty hardcore, anon.

>>8248368
Force scientists to read David Hume and respond to him.

>>8249831
>outgrow organized religion
>With the right social and cultural structures
you have a very narrow understanding of religion

>>8251276
No, I don't. I have a useful definition of religion.

In the past I used a very broad and abstract definition of religion similar to the one you're operating on, but abandoned it in all functional senses. The data and opinion is still there, it's just not framed as religion.

>>8248383
>flying cars

I hate this nonsense. What are they expecting that isn't already what a helicopter is?

What is science?

Oops, philosophical question.

>>8251314
Yeah, that's right. Get out of here you philosophizing liberal arts major, pseudointellectual, pretentious, fucking gutter TRASH. I prefer self referential truths. SCIENCE IS SCIENCE. PERIOD.

>>8251325
Relax, you could use some Stoicism. Just saying...

>>8249874
>there is only the physical and the rhetorical

whoever made this meme image is a fucking jokester

>>8251336
No, absolutely not. Most of my life has been lived with stoicism, and still is whether I like it or not.

I'll provide over the top parody of broken degenerates all I want. Short of beating their head in or rounding them up and using them for grunt work in labor camps, it's the least I must do. Pitiable and not worth wasting effort salvaging. They are to be used or ignored, and I must look at their outputs, I am to use them for my entertainment.

>>8249874
>using the word debunked unironically

what, is this a chemtrail video on youtube?

>>8251351
This. Debunkers are braindead degenerate trash who need a good smashin' around.

>>8248442
Hume and scientific anti-realists need to be read by anyone seriously engaging with science.

>>8248554
I heavily agree, people think western culture is "too present" when in most regards it's not present enough. Some good classes on empiricism, scientific anti-realism and the counter-arguments, naturalism, etc. would go well with science majors.

>>8248586
"Postmodernism" is a spook uneducated twats use to disparage something they don't get.

>>8249626
Continental philosophy says stuff which matters, analytic philosophy is sterile manchildry.

>>8250931
That isn't a proof. That's a shadow of what we believe is an atom.

>>8250861
That's true. Sad to see each and every pop scientist going so far from his competency. But at the same time people expect bright fairy tales and not science. No one cares about science.

>>8251370
Dumb shit

>>8251325
>too stupid to realize that science itself is just another form of philosophy.

When ever you seek truth, you are a philosopher

philo-lover
sophia- wisdom/truth

Scientists these days don't even realize that they are what they call materialists and naturally search for meaning in everything. Even if they don't believe in an ultimate reason behind it all, guess what, philosophy got you covered with that in nihilism.

It was philosophers that hypothesized out atoms
It was philosophers that hypothesized multiple realities
It was philosophers that hypothesized that time may not be linear
It was philosophers that made mathematics and science even relevant in the first place. No one wanted to do all that bullshit, it was men just trying to help find meaning in the mystery of life.
These concepts were thousands of years old before scientists took their time to prove it. The least philosophers are asking is to just recognize the significance that philosophy has on society and that it is the foundation of all branches of thought.

>>8251471
Philosophy is to science
what ornithology is to birds

>>8251471
don't try to associate your brainlet wanna-be scientist brethren with the real talent here, bub.

>>8251471
>It was philosophers that hypothesized out atoms
That atom was nothing like the modern atom.

>It was philosophers that hypothesized multiple realities
There's not a single shred of proof for multiple realities.

>It was philosophers that hypothesized that time may not be linear
Relativity proves that time is not universal, not that time isn't linear. The relationship of speed and time is, indeed, linear.

You sound like those Christianfags that claim the Bible was right before science.

>>8251471
It was strictly parody.

>>8251476
>That atom was nothing like the modern atom.
It was, actually. Especially the Hindu and later Buddhist variants, which focused less on scale and state change, and more on transference of energy.

>There's not a single shred of proof for multiple realities.
>Proof
You mean indication, or evidence. Universally, in all cases, that's the word you're actually looking for.

And it's probable you can't "prove" such a thing directly.

>Relativity proves
nothing about the most base truths of the universe.

>>8251486
>the solidness of the material corresponded to the shape of the atoms involved. Thus, iron atoms are solid and strong with hooks that lock them into a solid; water atoms are smooth and slippery; salt atoms, because of their taste, are sharp and pointed; and air atoms are light and whirling, pervading all other materials
>an inert solid (merely excluding other bodies from its volume) that interacts with other atoms mechanically. In contrast, modern, quantum-mechanical atoms interact via electric and magnetic force fields and are far from inert
ancient atoms by philosophers were nothing like real atoms

>>8251488
Yet they're everything like real compounds and bonding arrangements.

>>8251476
*tips fedora*

It was and is. Any 'science' that contradicts The Bible (evolution, round Earth, germ theory etc.) is wrong, heretical and fedora-tippingly edgy nonsense.

>>8251493
nothing like atoms, which was the point

also, this is a common case of the sharpshooter fallacy

over the centuries, a million philosophers have said a million different things about what atoms may be (none of them was right, obviously some were closer than others)

only when science came around, we discovered the truth, not thanks to charlatan philosophers

>>8251472

More like the reverse

Science is to philosophy
what ornithology is to birds

You fail to realize that science itself will never be a fulfilled theory. For no matter what, you will never be satisfied for what the universe is. You will still question why it is a certain way and you will never have the answer.

It's interesting, If you would pay attention to what we are looking into about science today, they foundation in reasoning are very philosophical.

>>8251474
Dont be mad that we perdicteverything that you try to prove

>>8251495
>nothing like atoms, which was the point
It was. Do some research on molecular geometry.

>only when science came around, we discovered the truth, not thanks to charlatan philosophers
I've already addressed this.
>>8249900

>>8251495

>only when science came around we discovered the truth, not thanks to charlatan philosopohers

Correction: It was only when scientists verified the hypothesis put forth by philosophers. Which btw at that time was no different from the philosophers when they first discovered it.

>>8251498
Genetics and Neuroscience have nothing philosophical. They are study of incredibly complex systems, aided with computerization, that obviously take a cross-generational spawn of time to study.

Management of information and mathematics have nothing philosophical. They are building upon abstract mathematical relationships.

Finally, physics have nothing philosophical, other than the crackpotery around them. Real physicists are looking for mathematical models to account for all the observed phenomena across a wide range of literature on experiments.

>>8251504
>it was
It was not. The atoms described were entirely and absolutely and conclusively different. Nothing like it.

>>8251515
>Capacity for bonding between different elements isn't a thing
>The atoms weren't simply geometric shapes interacting mechanically on that level, therefore it's completely wrong

Come on bud.

>>8251511

>Genetics and Neuroscience have nothing philosophical

Wrong. The sense of self and free will is a very popular discussion in these sciences

>Management of information and mathematics have nothing philosophical. They are building upon abstract mathematical relationships.

Weird? where did these abstract concepts come from? Why do they work so well? Do these truths still remain true without the universe?

>Finally, physics have nothing philosophical, other than the crackpotery around them. Real physicists are looking for mathematical models to account for all the observed phenomena across a wide range of literature on experiments.

Newtonian physics was entirly deterministic

Quantum physics deals with concepts like multi verses and the very limits of perception. (Heisenberg's uncertainty principle)

>Its a /sci/ hating on philosophy thread
Well we know this board is filled with brainlets so anything that questions their almighty science will be shot down with dank memes and mircoaggressions.

>>8251520
Across thousands of years and out of the million different philosophers that tried to explain how matter was essentially formed, the best you can find is an atom that's actually nothing like the real atom. Meanwhile, with science you got the truth of the matter within 50 years.

>>8251526
Stop trolling.

>>8248387
>All questions that can be solved without analyzing massive amounts of information are over.
This is tangential to this thread, but do you "natural sciences" dumbasses actually believe this? Since apparently you didn't realize: When you lab monkeys send off your data to us statisticians, it doesn't magically become part of a "massive mound of information"; the entire fucking field is about making inference based on relatively small samples.

>>8251526

>Across thousands of years and out of the million different philosophers that tried to explain how matter was essentially formed, the best you can find is an atom that's actually nothing like the real atom.

Dude you do realize science doesn't even know how matter is formed right?

And no science didn't figure it out in 50 years. There is no real "starting" point in science lol.

>>8251526
>Across thousands of years and out of the million different philosophers that tried to explain how matter was essentially formed, the best you can find is an atom that's actually nothing like the real atom. Meanwhile, with science you got the truth of the matter within 50 years.
We need to create an intelligence test on who should post on /sci/. Science is just an extension of philosophy. This is the only place in the internet that believes otherwise. Reddit science subreddits are much better for science topics because 4chan just speaks in memes. It didn't take scientists 50 years to figure out, it took them centuries. Even to this day we haven't seen an atom directly. We have theories on how it looks like but never seen it directly. So the philosophy posters are correct. Its just an idea we're hoping it turns out to be true.

>>8251522
>The sense of self and free will is a very popular discussion in these sciences
Nothing to do with genetics.

As per neuroscience, it's similar to physics. Across thousands of years, philosophers (and psychologists) have tried to explain how the human brain works. They were all wrong. Science comes around and finds the truth.

>where did these abstract concepts come from?
Axioms.

>Why do they work so well?
Because the axioms are useful.

>Do these truths still remain true without the universe?
Correct, because of the axioms.

>Quantum physics deals with concepts like multi verses
Nope.

>and the very limits of perception. (Heisenberg's uncertainty principle)
The limits of measurements, because when you make a measurement at a certain scale you begin to destroy information because of the act of measuring itself.

God, you are fucking dumb. Come back when you know something about anything. We have a name for you, a crackpot theorist. A moron that understands 10% of a topic and injects mysticism into it.

>>8251531
>science didn't figure it out in 50 years
1880-1930

>>8251531
>Dude you do realize science doesn't even know how matter is formed right?
This, we don't even know how mass is created or how it works. This is why the Higgs Boson was a huge deal. It took us one step closer to figuring out something Newton started researching centuries ago.

>>8251537
>The machinery of the human mind
>Nothing to do with genetics.

Come on.

>>8251539
We knew about the Higgs Boson since the 70s. It was just a experimental confirmation.

>>8251526
>everyone who got it wrong is a philosopher and everyone who got it right is a scientist
Tycho, Copernicus, Galileo, etc. -- by your measure, which were scientists and which were philosophers? And when exactly did the build up to heliocentrism "the science" start and when did heliocentrism "the philosophy" start? Same question goes for a lot of other swings in "science."

>>8251540
Not a popular discussion.

>>8251545
The difference between a philosopher and a scientist is that the scientist uses experiments and mathematics, while the philosopher pulls stuff out of his ass.

>>8251537

you're failing to understand that science is just perceptual truth, whereas philosophy is just about forming reasonable hypothesis. Some how you are putting this perceptual truth above forming hypothesis like it has nothing to do with the whole scientific process.

>>8251537
>As per neuroscience, it's similar to physics. Across thousands of years, philosophers (and psychologists) have tried to explain how the human brain works. They were all wrong. Science comes around and finds the truth.
Materialist detected. Neuroscientists don't know how the brain works as well. They're still stuck like previous psychologists and philosophers. Science doesn't find truth just an answer to our best approximation to date. It get updated with better precision technologies as the decades go by. Science never finishes, this is something they learn from philosophers.

>>8251556
>Neuroscientists don't know how the brain works as well.

They know how much they understand. Unlike philosophers and psychologists, who pull theories out of their ass with nothing to back them up.

>>8251538

this kid can't be this stupid

>>8251554
You have to be 18 and up to post on /sci/.
>>8251543
Peter Higgs "found" out about the boson in the 50s, he started doing experimental work in the mid 70s. He still hasn't complete his work because his intention was to solve Newton long standing question of what creates mass and what gives it mass. The Higgs Boson just influence other particles but why it does influence is much up to debate.

>>8251549
Gutter trash.

>>8251560
Like psychiatry bullshitting about chemical imbalances, and neurology bullshitting about sleep simply being recycling of cAMP and ADP.

Fuck off shiteating lying cocksucker.

>>8251565
>Peter Higgs "found" out about the boson in the 50s, he started doing experimental work in the mid 70s. He still hasn't complete his work because his intention was to solve Newton long standing question of what creates mass and what gives it mass. The Higgs Boson just influence other particles but why it does influence is much up to debate.
Math and experiments = Science

>Democritus pulled out of his ass some shit about what matter may be, it was all mostly wrong (still better than 99% of philosophers though)
Philosophy

>>8251560
Not really, much of their understanding comes from psychologists in teh 50s and 60s. The only difference between then and now is teh MRI, CT Scan and PET Scans machines. We don't know why we are sentient or why intelligence is created to our levels. Those two fields you hate created hypothesis on the brain which some are very valid. We know for certain that the brain doesn't stop development until your late 20s. This is recent research but we don't know anything about it. That organ is very complex and remains an enigma.

>>8251570
Math= a form of logic= philosophy
experiments= epistemology

we have the dumbest kids on our board, don't we folks?

Philosophers be like...

>>8251581
>every human pursuit is by definition philosophy
>every scientist was a philosopher too
>haha, got you, isn't philosophy great? :^) i just defined it to be anything

>>8251554
>implying most of canon philosophy isn't just about math / logic
>implying experiments aren't the rhetoric of science in exactly the same way thought experiments are the rhetoric of philosophy

I don't have any real connection to philosophy whatsoever, but it's mind boggling how fucking dumb the "contemporary science man shitting on philosophy" schtick is. It kind of makes sense that certain people do it (they're often the same people who get by in STEM fields through straight rote memorization rather than actually understanding the bigger system), but it's still crazy.

>>8251570
>Democritus pulled out of his ass some shit about what matter may be, it was all mostly wrong (still better than 99% of philosophers though)
Philosophy
>Democritus pulled out his ass some shit about what matter maybe
>what matter maybe
You do understand Chemists don't even know why matter exist or how its created. The field of matter is chemistry by teh way. Democritus work on atoms and matter in general is very much respected to this day. This board is just passive version of /pol/ which hates anything that's materialistic.

>>8251576
Confirmed for never reading a neuro-sci paper

>>8249813
>Le ebil religion

Ah now we see why you hate philosophers. Its really just your distaste towards religon.

I see your point now all knowing

tips fedora

>>8251586
>most of canon philosophy isn't just about math / logic
Nope

>implying experiments aren't the rhetoric of science in exactly the same way thought experiments are the rhetoric of philosophy
See >>8251472

>>8251590
Nobody hates philosophers. You are just a useless bunch.

>>8251585
>ignored that he was obviously wrong
>doesnt know what epistemology or logic is
> must deny the obvious relation between philosophy and science that was just pointed out
>throws remark pretending to understand the argument

>>8251587
>Democritus work on atoms and matter in general is very much respected to this day
nope, a footnote in introductory courses and nothing more

an interesting case of how someone pulled something out of his ass and sort of got it right (compared to the other million philosophers that simply got everything wrong)

>>8251586
>. It kind of makes sense that certain people do it (they're often the same people who get by in STEM fields through straight rote memorization rather than actually understanding the bigger system), but it's still crazy.
Feynman actually complained about this back in the 50s. He saw this rote of memorization at the toppest of all universities in the world and was enraged at the level of incompetent produce by these people. Its nothing new.
>>8251588
I have, but I'm guessing you haven't read a peer-review paper in your life.

>>8251433
Lel XD

>>8251597
Are you going to call Feynman a meme too?

>>8251592
>>most of canon philosophy isn't just about math / logic
>Nope
What do you mean "nope"? It IS mostly about logic.

>>8251599
Here's what Feynman thinks about you: >>8251602

>>8251598
>nope, a footnote in introductory courses and nothing more
Please tell me you're trolling? If your professor was really competent then he would have assigned his work as supplementary reading for your nuclear physics class.

>>8251599
>Its nothing new.
Huh. Interesting.

>>8251602
why ignore the argument?

are you saying that science has no epistemology and logic?

>>8251612
If you define philosophy in such a broad sense, then Hitler was a philosopher too.

>>8251602
>>8251605
Feynman never said that. Just because its in a meme picture doesn't mean its real.
>People are fucking retarded in the internet - George Washington
back to
>>>/b/ you memelord.

>>8251616
epystomology is a branch of philosophy

logic is the core of all of it

>>8251621
See >>8251602

>>8249599
>>8249620
why the fuck

>>8251616

and everyone is a bit of a philosopher. It's just some are evidently extremely inept than others. And yet here you are

>>8251617
Whether or not he said it doesn't really matter because it's a dumb thing to say anyway; just because physicists (at least the mouthy ones) haven't found a use for philosophy of science in extracting meaning from their research doesn't mean all other fields have their heads in the sand about it (e.g. philosophy of probability has greatly impacted statistics).

>>8251623
see>>8251620

lol ignoring the argument still

Just admit it and say the scientific method is an output of epistemology and that logic is the core of science as is philosophy. why you got to be so mad

>>8251626
So the only way to make philosophy sound useful is to expand the meaning so much that everything from Hitler to a farmer counting cows is philosophy.

>>8248586
>Muh Post-modern

I bet you didn't visit a museum in months.

>>8251630
1 Feynman is worth 1,000,000 Nietzches

see >>8251631

>>8251631

The meaning was broad to begin with dumbass

Philosophy:the study of the fundamental nature of knowledge, reality, and existence, especially when considered as an academic discipline. See also natural philosophy.

Is science not part of reality?

Philosophy did a billion times more for my mental health and well-being than DUDE CHRMICAL IMBALANCES LMAO and DUDE LEARNED HELPELESSNESS LMAO

philosophy is ennobling, life-affirming, and beautiful. That is its value.

Kill yourself you dead inside fedoralord lab monkey faggots

>>8251635
Go back to counting cows, farmer.

Scientists are busy with the real deal.

>>8248649
mighty fine

>>8251638
HAHAH BTFO

Philosophers remain superior in debate and logic once again !

>>8251636
So you are admitting that philosophy is just like religion, opium for the retards?

>>8251636
>schizophrenic guy said philosophy is ok
Well, that proves it

>>8251641
Isn't science doing the same for you right this very instant? If its all meaningless whats the point in valuing science above all?

Oh wait we are back to doing philosophy

>>8251640
>I define philosophy to be literally everything, therefore science is also philosophy, engineering is philosophy, mathematics is philosophy, Hitler is philosophy, a cow is philosophy
>woohoo I won

Enjoy working at McDonalds while scientists (who are not philosophers) save the world

>>8249874
someone better explain the fuck out of that picture

>>8251644
>its all meaningless
Who said that? Who are you quoting?

>>8248594
>The biggest worry is that academic philosophy is becoming too technical
are you talking about "it becoming" in the sense of it being in the future? Did you mean the nature of its being is changing? Is it becoming to technical in itself or for itself and what of the being of its technicality?

>>8251641
>anything that makes you feel good about life is a lie

Kys you gay child

>>8251645
actually I didnt

>>8251641
>religious is the opium for retards
Holy fucking shit don't cut yourself with that edge and clean your fedora once in a while.

>>8251652

>>8251648
Enlighten me with your science to prove otherwise. Oh wait, thatll never happen

>>8251654
CTRL+F "fedora"
5 results

You sure are trying hard, brainlet

>>8251645
>while scientists save the world
lmao.

>>8251657
>claims his opponent said something he never said
>can't provide a quote
>"p-prove me wrong"
What a total shitfest

>>8251655
>Can't admit I was being stupid
>Uploads picture with no source to make it look real or insulting

kid just stop you're embarrassing yourself

>>8251663
It's the *same* source, brainlet

>>8251662
So science can't prove it all huh?

>>8251667

>>8249841
"nothing" is a word.
Give 2 people a vacuum on one side and X on the other side and ask them to point to "nothing". They will point to the vacuum, no matter what X is.
a vacuum is pretty nothing afaik

>>8251665
I got mine from oxford dictionaries. Idk how you can call yourself a scientist without providing any evidence behind your claim of what a "philosopher" is

>>8251645
>while scientists (who are not philosophers) save the world
AHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHA! You know who saves the world? The alpha chads in the special forces. They go after teh predators who will rape your little hole for pleasure. Go out in the real world and you'll see the people saving the world are often those who looked down upon. Fucking nurses get shitted on by people but they are the fucking reason why doctors can function in a medical environment. Trash man prevent diseases by taking out your trash from your streets. Janitors clean your offices/bathroom to prevent diseases/rats. You have a very retarded outlook on life. Also you have to be 18+ to post on here.

>>8250931
what I see is firstphotoof.jpg
do you see an atom there?

>>8251674
>brainlet can't see it's quite literally the same source, as evidenced by the fact that it was obtained from the same website

>>8251671

nothing is a concept.

>>8251598
You say "pulled out of his ass" as though he wasn't basing it on anything, and didn't travel the western world and spend a lifetime formalizing his ideas.

It was all very much based on improving the prevalent ideas of his time, and would have met the bar for rigor based on the information and tools available.

>>8251671
This nigga thinks a quantum vacuum is actually nothing. Lmao

>>8251676
>what I see is firstphotoof.jpg
Oh really? You can see the bits in your memory? Tell me your secrets, wizard of Ohm.

>>8251677
No i used oxford dictionaries as it said in my pic. Yours on the other hand..

>>8251675
>>>/x/

Today on /sci/ we learn this board is filled with retarded brainlets who believe science is the key to everything. No wonder all the good posters left to reddit. I'm going there too. FUCK Y'ALL and go suck a cactus.

>>8251684
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/philosopher

stay rekt

>>8251688
Make sure to call them degenerate gutter trash before you go. They need to hear it from more than just me.

>>8251686
This board is fucking trash

>>8251688
>believe science is the key to everything
Who are you quoting? Nice strawman you built there.

>>8251689
>http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/philospher

You looked up philosophER you fucking idiot

http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/scientist?q=scientist+

stay rekt

>>8251686
This board is trash and what he said is correct.
I'm following this guy. >>8251688
Everyone go to /r/science on reddit.

>>8251691
Your post was trash. Go rant to myspace.

>>8251694
>le incredulous fedora man

He's quoting half the brainlets in this thread you fucking retard

>>8251696
>You looked up philosophER
Yes, and? Can't you read? It says philosopher here: >>8251655

I hate all of you.

>>8251697
I agree.

>>8251476
>The relationship of speed and time is, indeed, linear.

>>8251699
>there are 58 posters ITT
>he's quoting half of them (29 of them)
>there's at least 29 posts ITT that claim "science is the key to everything"
>he can't provide one example though

>>8251700
we were arguing what the definiton of philosophy was you dipshit. My point was it was broad already you fuck head. Im done wasting my time with you. You clearly are 12 years old. Do yourself a favor and apply for mcdonalds when you turn 16. Youll be there for a long time anyways.

>>8251706
>c-cite your sources!!!
>half the posters in this thread means let's see, 58 divided by 2, carry the 1...

Fuck off tismo-tron

>>8251707
Why would a scientist work for McDonalds? I think a philosopher like you is more suited for the job anyway.

>>8251704
Not to Eisenstein and numerous other recent scientists

>>8251710
>he needs to carry the 1 to divide 58 by 2
ahahahahahahahahahahahaahahahahaha

fucking brainlets

also, no post claimed science was everything, you can't find any

>>8251711
Never claimed to be a philosophy. try again, we all know youre 12. peace

>>8251717
>Never claimed to be a philosophy
me two plus two, very smart, ooga booga

>>8251697
>go to /r/science on reddit
Holy shit there's actual science on that board. FUCK THIS PLACE.

>>8251716
Hahahaha that's part of the joke you autismal fucking goober goddamn

>>8251722
>invent posts that never existed
>totally embarrassed as he scrolls through the thread but can't find a single post that claims science is everything
>he goes on an claim that half the posters said it
>posts nowhere to be seen
embarrassing

>>8251725
Your autism is terminal. I'm sorry.

philosophy should be the cornerstone of education
it's the mother discipline that unifies the whole of human thought
the theory of reality is ultimately philosophy
that's what we're working on

>>8251537
>The limits of measurements, because when you >make a measurement at a certain scale you begin to destroy information because of the act of measuring itself.

>The sense of self and free will is a very popular discussion in these sciences
>Nothing to do with genetics.

>It's not a science

Glorious. You inject mysticism into simple Terminology and form of repertoire and rhetoric.
You're simply too stupid to comprehend.

The NEED or the comfort to communicate is also not representative for any other form of need or the same need for other forms and certainly not for how you communicate with people.
>Formulate idea without language.
Even if so you would still be lost. You would be ,simply autistic, by empiric standard at least.

Don't tell me you're a better mathematician than this guy just because you're born a hundred years later.

-The book deals with the problems of philos-
ophy and shows, as I believe, that the method of formulating these problems rests on the mis- understanding of the logic of our language. Its whole meaning could be summed up somewhat as follows: What can be said at all can be said clearly; and whereof one cannot speak thereof one must be silent.

You'll discredit the whole "philosophy" you're part of.

>>8251739
>You'll discredit the whole "philosophy" you're part of.

We already covered this topic (defining philosophy to be literally anything from Hitler to cows)

We concluded that whatever philosophy is, a philosopher does not understand all those topics, nor contribute to them in any meaningful way.

>>8251635
no, science is not part of reality. Like math isnt either. Thats why there isnt a dedicated philosophy of math. That and because you wouldnt understand it anyways

>>8251679
"concept" is a word.
but even if you put the concept of nothing in for X a lot of people would still point to the vacuum when you ask for nothing. Kraus will be fine using the word nothing for the concept of a volume of empty space as you might find it 20 AU outside of our solar system

>>8251743
Philosophy of mathematics exists.
See fundamental crisis in mathematics and read all the good shit it proccured.

>>8251714
also not to some old timey philosophers says anon

>>8251742
>We concluded that whatever philosophy is, a philosopher does not understand all those topics, nor contribute to them in any meaningful way.
is much friendlier than

>>8251631


How does the cow become more useful once explained?
It is still the same idea of a cow, just explained.

How are you contributing usefulness when all you can do is define it by historical projection.

Dedicated philosophy of math is also philosophy of language. The appeal to the subject to be logical doesn't turn the thing into something logical which is fine because it is what makes logic unsubjectifiable...

>>8251785

>>8251679
>>8251765
nothing isn't a concept
the concept 'nothing' is a concept
nothing is the thing that concept is a concept of
if everything came from nothing, it's not like everything came from a concept

>>8251767
youre not helping my Demagogueism

>>8251808
>nothing is the thing that concept is a concept of
I think you meant
nothing is the thing that the concept 'nothing' is the concept of
so really you meant nothing

>>8251803
Feynman was an unfortunate self disgusted philosopher. I wonder if he ever reconciled this.

>>8251822
why is it so important to you, that philosophers love themselves?

>>8251803
only reason ornithology isn't useful to birds is they can't understand it
saying ornithology wouldn't be useful to birds if they could understand it is like saying the study of humans isn't useful to humans

inquiry into science is obviously useful to scientists qua scientists whether it's philosophy of science or one of the metasciences like sociology of science

the questions of how to be a good scientist, how to live virtuously as a human being who is a scientist, why be a scientist at all, and what science is really all about are all questions that it's basically downright irrational or vicious to ignore as a scientist, and they're questions of (normative) philosophy of science

not to mention sociology of science is needed to gauge expert consensus, which most scientists (embracing a particular philosophy of science) believe is integral to the notion of progress, which most scientists (embracing a further particular philosophy of science) believe is integral to science

>>8251832
The statement isn't about philosophers.

>>8251818
what do you mean I meant nothing
you didn't correct anything

>>8251834
how is anthropology useful to me? what good will it be to me to know that humans are social animals, when Im alone on mars, dying? I have to fix the ventilation somehow.

>>8251839
unga bunga?

>>8251839
what the fuck nigger don't go to mars to fix ventilation if you're an anthropologist
problem solved

>>8251839
unga , unga bunga?

>>8251836
it seemed to be about at least one and I think you made a similar remark above

>>8251837
You said when you meant 'nothing' or nothing, so I did fix something. If you didnt mean to write that, then you clearly meant not anything.

>>8251839
You'll be too brain damaged from the trip to be fixing much of anything.

Sorry man. You're trapped, and you always will be.

>>8251849
I've had enough entertaining people's bullshit to explain the obvious to you.

If you don't see how saying it's a shame someone is something in all bad their own self perception, and that this translates to self disgust, it's your own dumbass problem.

>>8251832
he's saying Feynman was disgusted with philosophy but engaged in it anyway while in denial

>>8251849
>You said when you meant 'nothing' or nothing, so I did fix something.
wtf does this mean
I didn't misplace any quotation marks if that's what you mean. if you think i did then you didn't understand me

>>8251859
Not only that, it's what he predominantly engaged in.

His abstraction to the most general case. His lateral thinking. His tangential connections. It's philosophy, all of it. It's all philosophical positions. Right down to him saying in the 40's that there is a difference between stating that the notion of there being a relationships between space and time, is much different than stating that there exists, -a-, spacetime.

>>8251868
fuck sciolistic scientism

>>8251864
>nothing is the thing that concept is a concept of
this sentence of yours makes no sense.

>>8251874
"that concept" refers to the concept mentioned in the previous line

>>8251875
That was my understanding. Thus I condesed it and drew my conclusion in this post:>>8251818

>>8251839
>anthropology is the only study of humans
>no such thing as psychology, sociology, physiology, history, archeology, social theory, economics, political science, literature, art history, social and political philosophy, ethics, ...

>>8251882
well you quoted me right then but I don't understand your conclusion at all
how did I mean nothing if I meant "nothing is the thing that the concept 'nothing' is the concept of"?
are you reading it as "there isn't anything that the concept 'nothing' is the concept of"?

>>8251889
oh I have some knowledge of these topics, where they apply to humans, but I dont like the idea of trying to learn the martians language and ask them for help. They dont seem to know about technical stuff anyways and Im an anthropolgist, not a xeno-linguist

>>8251903
>Im an anthropolgist
why did u go

>>8251895
Im reading it as a circular sentence that Im reading it as.
Your alternate reading seems to be spot on though.

>>8251907
I wanted to study what kind of humans would go to mars

>>8251911
I don't know what you mean by "circular"
I suppose it's tautological
I'm just trying to make the same statement about nothing as I'd be making about sand if I said "sand is the thing the concept 'sand' is the concept of" -- which is what I'd be saying if someone had claimed sand is a concept, i.e. that sand is the concept 'sand' itself and not the thing that that concept is the concept of

>>8251915
what kind is it then

>>8251943
The initial crew seemed to have been a bunch of hipsters who didnt think it through. Otherwise its mostly technicians and anthropologists. Theyre all dead now. The logs say they had an argument about the point of them being there and then the whole place got flodded with gas.

>>8251300

I would think a car, that can fly.

>>8251935
dictionary faggot