[ 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: 39 KB, 720x466, 43b701_db406608a64b4ef7ac1f4440624d1b99.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11995602 No.11995602 [Reply] [Original]

why is philosophy incredibly important for science but not vice-versa?

>> No.11995615

>>11995602
Because philosophers would rather ignore reality than have to ponder it and risk being wrong.

>> No.11995623

>>11995602
Philosophers haven't contributed anything towards science, but scientists have contributed loads towards philosophy. I think the question should be, why are philosophers even allowed to do philosophy?

>> No.11995682

>>11995623
>why are philosophers even allowed to do philosophy?
sounds like a question for..

>> No.11995719

>>11995623
>Philosophers haven't contributed anything towards science
Sure...

>> No.11995747

>>11995623
The concept of atoms for a start

>> No.11995754

Philosophy is affected by science, people who say otherwise are fucking retarded
Science gives empirical evidence, the best kind of evidence, to use in logic, epistemology, etc

>> No.11995777
File: 897 KB, 963x1386, 4.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11995777

>>11995754
>Science gives empirical evidence, the best kind of evidence,

>> No.11995791

>>11995754
>Science gives empirical evidence, the best kind of evidence,
Take the rationalismpill

>> No.11995798

>>11995754
>Science gives empirical evidence, the best kind of evidence,
Go look for a perfect circle for me, then we might be able to have an interesting discussion

>> No.11996528

>>11995719
We call them scientists, the ones who did.

>> No.11996621
File: 386 KB, 576x704, book.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11996621

>explains world and your reality
>BTFOs philosophy

>> No.11996652

>>11995602
a pile of shit doesn't need a rose but a rose needs a pile of shit for manure

>> No.11996660
File: 4 KB, 54x112, 20200811_112527.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11996660

>>11995602
LOL!

>> No.11996795

>philosophy of mind
Solved by neuroscience

>epistemology
Solved by the scientific method

>logic
Solved by math

>ontology
Solved by physics

>ethics
Solved by game theory

>> No.11996812

>>11995602
>philosophy incredibly important for science
Source?

>> No.11996817

>philosophy
>important

yeah maaan like whaaat if the universe was created last thursday u can't prove that it wasn't xD

>> No.11996829

Well, for one thing, without a rudimentary respect for philosophical thinking, you make ridiculous mistakes like Lawrence Krauss claiming quantum field theory explains why there's something rather than nothing.

>> No.11996838

>>11995623
Everyone under 18 should be permabanned from ever posting

>> No.11996861

>>11996795
Wrong on all counts

>> No.11996962

>>11996861
spoken like a true npc

>> No.11996965

>>11996962
Nope, NPCs are the ones who are strict materialist "I fucking love science!" pseuds i.e. what you wrote in your post.
I am smarter than you.

>> No.11997023

>>11996965
You're a midwit at best. Can't keep up with the smart Chads but deluding yourself into the illusion of being intelligent because you compare yourself to retards.

>> No.11997033

>>11995602
depends
there are many philosophies

>> No.11997036

>>11996795
>>ethics
>Solved by game theory
lmao

>> No.11997077
File: 1.72 MB, 400x292, giphy (12).gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11997077

>>11997033
>there are many philosophies
No.

>> No.11997094

>>11997023
>You're a midwit at best
False
>Can't keep up with the smart Chads
I am one
>but deluding yourself into the illusion of being intelligent because you compare yourself to retards.
Yes, you are a retard, and I'm comparing myself to you and seeing how much more intelligent I am than yourself. Makes no difference to anything, though.

>> No.11997099

>>11997094
Quick, tell me the smartest thing you know!

>> No.11997103

>>11997099
Quite a display of your stupidity.
Continue seething.

>> No.11997118
File: 780 KB, 720x900, unknown-195.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11997118

Philosophy is a fun game to play in the spare time of scientists. Id never want a philosopher in my lab though.

>> No.11997162

>>11997103
Nope, that wasn't a smart response. You failed.

>> No.11997177

>>11997162
Absolute seething and cope.
Stop embarrassing yourself

>> No.11997186

>>11995602
Science is a type of philosophy, but there are many other types of philosophy besides it. Many fields have their own philosophy which guide research, assumptions that make work in the field possible, but can never be "proven."

>> No.11997197

>>11997177
>repetition
You failed the Turing test. Even a chat bot gives smarter replies.

>> No.11997212

>>11997197
I do not need to pass your "tests" because you are not as intelligent as I am and can't even conceive of a test that would be worthy of my time. Saying "say something smart!" is not a valid test (obviously).
You would have already understood this if you were slightly more intelligent than you are (which you are not, of course).

>> No.11997216

>>11997212
Since you are still replying, your time is obviously worthless.

>> No.11997221

>>11997216
False

>> No.11997226

>>11997221
In that case you consider this time well spent. I'll take that as a compliment.

>> No.11997321
File: 73 KB, 1280x720, grung.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11997321

>>11995747
>grung see rock
>grung see rock break into smaller rock
>grung see very tiny rock by water
>grung think smaller rock make rock
>grung think very tiny rock make smaller rock
>grung think tiny make big
thank you philosophy, very cool

>> No.11997338

Any proper scientist or engineer can answer all philosophical questions in like 5 minutes which causes philosophers to cry.

>> No.11997395

>>11997338
Like what?

>> No.11997407

>>11995602
>why is philosophy incredibly important for science but not vice-versa?
Not all things that are true or have ontological existence can be analyzed with science. So science does not encapsulate all knowledge. It is a subset of philosophy and knowledge.

>> No.11997417

>>11997395
Whether you want fries with that

>> No.11997422

>>11997417
top lep

>> No.11997496

>>11996795
Isn’t this a pasta?

>> No.11997501

>>11996795
>>philosophy of mind
>Solved by neuroscience
You don’t understand pom or neuroscience
>>epistemology
>Solved by the scientific method
True in only a narrow area of life, and a product of epistemology
>>logic
>Solved by math
Math is an area of logic


>>ethics
>Solved by game theory
Lmao

>> No.11997552

It is like at the beggining there were several toughts and then evolved branches of science. later they became more specific and exact. And nowadays stuff like cosmology are becomming more and more teoretical - philosophic because they are not possibilities how to continue in exact way - at the moment.

>> No.11997562

>>11997501
>Math is an area of logic
Nope, and fuck philosophers and their totally crappy understanding of logic.

http://girard.perso.math.cnrs.fr/mustard/article.html

>> No.11997704

>>11997562
>fuck philosophers and their totally crappy understanding of logic.
Logic is philosophy

>> No.11997948

>>11997704
>Logic is philosophy
And fuck semantic ambiguities arising from the retarded use of natural language.

>> No.11997981

>>11997948
Indeed

>> No.11998005

>>11997226
>>11997221
>>11997216
>>11997212
>>11997197
>>11997177
>>11997162
>>11997103
>>11997099
>>11997094
>>11997023
>>11996965
>>11996962
You need to be 18+ to post here

>> No.11998498

>>11997981
>Indeed
Philosophers indulge in this kind of nonsense though. First prize to Jacques "Topology-of-Neurosis-is-a-Torus" Lacan and his goddamn bullshit only supported by retarded plays on words.

>> No.11998579

What philosophy? Ancient philosophy? Then it's because ancient philosophy also contained the beginning of science. Modern philosophy? Not so much.

>> No.11998606

>>11995623
>>11995602
To be fair, both scientists/philosophers are useless bag of meat. The real contributors to the civilizations are engineers.

>> No.11998805

>>11996817
kys

>> No.11999163

>>11998498
I mean, I agree with you. Some retards believe that by warping language hard enough they can also affect reality

>> No.11999209

Science is a wholly-contained subset of philosophy. Without philosophy, you would not have science, but without science, you would still have philosophy.

>> No.11999330

>>11998498
Scientists create causality's,
mathematicians formulas,
philosophers create concepts,
and artists create worlds.

>> No.11999339

>>11995798
I don’t think you know what empiricism means...
>>11996829
>claiming quantum field theory explains why there's something rather than nothing
I mean it literally does in any relevant sense...

>> No.11999348

>>11999209
>but without science, you would still have philosophy.
What’s the difference? In both situations, you’re left with nothing useful.

>> No.12000358

>>11996795
>>ethics
>Solved by game theory
please explain this one haha

>> No.12000605

Is there a point to the continued study of philosophy, now that we have science and maths? There may or may not "need" to be a point, but regardless, is there one and what is it?

>> No.12000606

>>11995602
Philosophy is rather nice for science, because it trains you to think about abstract concepts and ideas critically, which becomes rather useful for far-out fields. Concepts like null are extremely useful, but difficult to conceptualize.

The problem with modern philosophy is that "philosophers" come across as pseuds who focus on definitions too much to even try to understand ideas. I bet most modern philosophers would have trouble understanding the logic in math, much less actual mathematical proofs.

>> No.12000652

>>12000605
There was never really a "point" to study philosophy in the first place, it's just something that people naturally do, and will continue to do.

>> No.12000705
File: 1.77 MB, 810x810, __kuroeda_san_elf_san_wa_yaserarenai_drawn_by_lewdlemage__93c4778dd0af66144a2d5c61ae98b637.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12000705

>>12000606
Most people think philosophy is just the shit that comes outta of continental philosophy.

>>11995623
You probably wouldn't be typing this if it weren't for a certain crisis in the foundations of Mathematics.

>> No.12000709

>why?
It's because of the relationship between subsets and supersets.

>> No.12000731

Mathematics and philosophy are interchangeable languages. It all comes from the psyche. Think uniquely and pay attention. After the session, recall what you witnessed and write it into math. Make some philosophy and do some science.
Psychology is the most important.

>> No.12000764
File: 99 KB, 541x559, 1596960000781.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12000764

>Anon can you lower the acidity of this solution?
>the pathetic simulacrum of natural phenomena that you call that pH scale is a false hegelian deity enforced by oedipal man made constructs. all i can say is yikes, because you requested something stupid like this. hurting others feelings is anti-kantain-ethics and violates the categorical imperative.

>> No.12000876

>>12000731
>psychology is the most important
I was with you until you said this.

>> No.12000897

>>12000876
eyah. sorry. I'm not sure what I meant either. It's really about opening books and learning instead of Anonymous used splash.

>> No.12000932

>>11997023
>deluding yourself into the illusion
Painfully bad writing.

>> No.12001000
File: 87 KB, 608x422, plato.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12001000

>>>11995615
science is based in the assumption that reality exists, and only philosophy can explain why reality exists or not based in reason

>> No.12001043

Mathematics studies the natural and unnatural, the reasonable up to the absurd. To make claims and justify. Forging its own path
Philosophy is to appeal and justify its own existence when it is called upon, to serve

>> No.12001303

>>11995602
polymaths make the best philosophers a.k.a chad.

>> No.12001384

>>12001000
>philosophy can explain why reality exists
[citation needed]

>> No.12001637

>>12001303
Poincare was the most recent

>> No.12002183

>>12000705
Are you talking about the incompleteness theorem? If so if you think hard enough about it, it doesn't matter because constructive mathematics is where it is at.

>> No.12003029

>>11995602
the problem with your bait picture is that a epistemological philosopher cant do any of the things that the supposedly less pure fields can do.