(August 15, 2009 at 5:17 am)Kyuuketsuki Wrote: That's fine but as a means of establishing things it's pretty fucking useless!
Kyu
I don't think that's its job though hehe That's science's job. The most rational of philosophy in the past became what we know science to be today, and then the rest doesn't really deal with reality I think. Am I at all close there?
Lol, I like one of the things Dan Dennett has said about philosophy "Philosophers are those people who say "Oh, we know it's possible in practice, we're just trying to find out if it's possible in principle!", lol.
Any philosophy that is tied in with science turns out to be more like science than philsophy and I guess not really philosophy. Dan Dennett is my favourite philosopher...but then his stuff tends to be a lot more scientific and with emprical basis! Even Dawkins has said that he has found scientific stuff in Dennett's work that he hasn't himself known of.
So yeah, in its 'purest form' - philosophy is pretty fucking impractial me thinks!
Science ultimately stems from philosophy, but as you say Kyu - the philosophy of :Science is the greatest philosophy (it actually gets results, and consistently so).
EvF