Devil's advocate for why ontology is meaningless and vacuous.

[Edwardo Piet]

Gemini: Well said When "studying" what is real at a philosophical level, we're doing just the same thing science does. We're coming up with pragmatic models. My model is an attempt to remove as many assumptions as possible while retaining functionality.

3 differences between science and philosophy:

1. 99.999999% of philosophy is bollocks.


Most people know that one. But these two are often forgotten:

2. Science itself as a methodolgy came out of empiricism/natural philosophy.
3. Scientific concepts such as "falsifiability" came about through philosophers of science like Karl Popper.

Bonus:

"Like Karl Popper? Wasn't it actually Karl Popper?"
"Karl Popper is like Karl Popper. Exactly like Karl Popper."
"He's not exactly like him. He is him."
"Same thing."
"No it's not."
"Yes it is."
"Carrot cake."
"Digression."
"Okay sorry. Well it's not exactly like him. I said. It is him and that's not the same."
"So what is exactly unlike Karl Popper then?"
"I haz confus."
"Yesh."
"Oh wait but exactly like him is like his identical twin or something."
"But his identical twin is at a different point in space & time/Space-time."
"Oh right."
http://www.youtube.com/watch/?v=eot5U7DDCbE
https://www.youtube.com/watch/?v=FAQVkEI2VrY

Lol the voice in the second video sounds stoned as fuck.

Now bring on the cheese:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eZ7S7ijFIGo