[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 16 KB, 633x758, wojak cry.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10215441 No.10215441 [Reply] [Original]

/lit/ is making fun of us again

>>>/lit/12227030

>> No.10215453

>as of now science does not know its place and if science ever does become self aware it would kill itself
is that anon right?

>> No.10215463

Is fiction even literature

>> No.10215466
File: 21 KB, 391x400, black programmer.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10215466

>>10215441
>I fucking luv science
>CS

They're making fun of /g/ and you should >>>/g/o back there monkey.

>> No.10215467

I'm a physics phd and I mostly go on /sci/ to laugh at people. I go on /lit/ to laugh at people and for some actual intellectual discussion too.

>> No.10215468

>>/lit/12228268
Did I get 'em good, fellas?

>> No.10215471

Excluding yourself to either pure science or pure literature is brainlet tier unless you are a literal god at either of them. Enjoy good writing and learning new things are signs of high intellect.

>> No.10215474

>>10215468
whoops
>>>/lit/12228268

>> No.10215489

Wish I could go back in time and MURDER gödel

>> No.10215490

>>10215468
Based and redpilled

>> No.10215491

>>10215474
Absolutely sublime, anon.

>> No.10215495

>>10215441
>Science isn’t even an objective field. Experimental results are interpreted according to an agreed- upon paradigm. The only reason contemporary physics is considered more reliable than astrology, alchemy, or philosophy is because most physicists agree to interpret experimental data using said paradigm.

Is he right lads?

>> No.10215496

>>10215495
No, he's a brainlet who doesn't understand what a theory is.

>> No.10215503

>>10215495
The first two sentences are correct, assuming by "objective" we mean unmediated truth. The last sentence is autism. And besides, there's no such thing as an unmediated experience (mediation is necessarily and inherently implied) so his first point is interesting but just that.

>> No.10215507

>>10215503
Could you please explain what it means for an experience to be mediated?

>> No.10215508

>>10215495
if he was actually well versed in literature he would know that philosiphers have already established that literally nothing has objective reality and arguing that objective reality doesn't exist is a pointless argument because if that is true then your own arguments cannot be objective because they are based in logic which is not objective by its own definitions.

>> No.10215520

>>10215507
The experience is the mediation. It's the link between the subject (man) and the object (external reality). You can't receive information about an object without the mechanism (experience) allowing you to receive it. This is the best I can do without getting into philosophical jargon.

>> No.10215531

>>10215520
Where do I read more about this?

>> No.10215544

>>10215531
You can look up realism and idealism (or empiricism and rationalism, although they aren't straight substitutes), two different "schools" in philosophy. Kant really brings them together and solidifies the system, although I wouldn't recommend starting with Kant if you aren't familiar with philosophy.

>> No.10215549

>>10215544
I've read the SEP entry on idealism. Which work of Kant did you have in mind?

>> No.10215565

>>10215549
It's his magnum opus, The Critique of Pure Reason. But you can also read his Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics which serves as an introduction. If you can't understand that then don't waste your time or money on the Critique.

>> No.10215578

>>10215565
Thanks I'll check out Prolegomena. Coincidentally I downoaded Critique last night.

>> No.10215737

>>10215441
The lion does not concern himself with the opinions of sheep.

>> No.10215753

They are right. This board is shit. You get played so easily by /pol/ it's not even funny. Why cannot we ever have a thread where we ignore the obvious shills? Why does every thread have to degenerate into a retarded shitflinging with /pol/fags?

>> No.10215758

>>10215441
>>>/g/

>> No.10216599

>>10215441
they cant do basic maths though

>>>/lit/12230022

>> No.10216602

>>10216599
that's dimensional analysis though

>> No.10216607

>>10216602
>anon reads 400 words per minute, book is 365712 words, how long will it take anon to read the book?

that's a grade school level exercise anon

>> No.10216609

>>10216607
and he did it right yeah
he missed the dimensions (words per minute) though

>> No.10216610

>>10215441
Nnnoooo