How much do you like philosophy?

[pineapplebunnybounce]

Actually science functions by having people make hypothesis logically and then checking if they're real. Philosophy stops right before the checking. What's the point?

But there would be no such thing as a scientific method in the first place, nor any kind of interpretation, for that matter, if we didn't have philosophy.

Even when you're discussing the existence of God or about religion with theists on this forum - that is philosophy also.

Thus you wouldn't be able to refute any theists on this forum without using philosophy.

Yea I'm aware of that. But philosophy breeds science because back then people did not have the capacity to test things. A lot of philosophers philosophized about the natural world, the atom was a philosophical idea, but now we've shown that you can split an atom (badly named perhaps), but now we can make new theories and philosophical ideas about nature and see how they test out. Medicine used to be practiced as a philosophy and not a science, that didn't work out well. Philosophy may inform thought and belief, but everything does, everyone is capable of imagination and belief. I'm not quite sure what philosophy actually lays claim to, is it logic? Is it theories? Is it ideas?

---

By that I mean you cannot disprove your null hypothesis or your hypothesis and you wouldn't know if your theory is right or wrong. So all you have is that theory or hypothesis but I do not see where you go from there. Not everything that is logical is true or real.

You didn't answer the question.

You asked me what I meant by it contributes nothing, I've explained what I meant by that. I meant how do you move forward. Which I admit was a bad and incorrect way to phrase it, but I honestly do not know what it contributes in addition to that, but you're right that could be just a limitation of my imagination and not fact.

Anyway I'm not here to discredit philosophy, just one of the many people who don't get it and have no interest in it.

[Angrboda]

You didn't answer the question.

You asked me what I meant by it contributes nothing...

Now you're just a fucking liar. I asked no such question.

[pineapplebunnybounce]

I really was just answering Rayaan's OP and then further explaining why I have the opinions I have. If I've misrepresented you, I misunderstood and I apologize. But I'm no longer interested in this discussion.

[MindForgedManacle]

Yea I'm aware of that. But philosophy breeds science because back then people did not have the capacity to test things. A lot of philosophers philosophized about the natural world, the atom was a philosophical idea, but now we've shown that you can split an atom (badly named perhaps), but now we can make new theories and philosophical ideas about nature and see how they test out. Medicine used to be practiced as a philosophy and not a science, that didn't work out well. Philosophy may inform thought and belief, but everything does, everyone is capable of imagination and belief. I'm not quite sure what philosophy actually lays claim to, is it logic? Is it theories? Is it ideas?

Of course they had the capacity to test things. You think people, around Galileo's time, all of a sudden exclaimed "Bugger me! You can test things against the world!" Aristotle did some of that, after all. The problem was that much of the academic concern prior to that was more abstract, and in particular about various concepts and of God. Sure, there were some who doubted you could obtain true knowledge about the world of experience, but no one can really stick to that in everyday life.

If philosophy 'lays claim' to anything, I think it'd be the concepts that underpin what we believe about the world.

Anyway I'm not here to discredit philosophy, just one of the many people who don't get it and have no interest in it.

I don't think anyone would get on you about that. I just think some of us get irked when comments are made in the same vein as someone who got mad at physicists for not coming up with a new interpretation lf, say, Jane Eyre: it's kinda've a silly objection.

[pineapplebunnybounce]

Yea I'm aware of that. But philosophy breeds science because back then people did not have the capacity to test things. A lot of philosophers philosophized about the natural world, the atom was a philosophical idea, but now we've shown that you can split an atom (badly named perhaps), but now we can make new theories and philosophical ideas about nature and see how they test out. Medicine used to be practiced as a philosophy and not a science, that didn't work out well. Philosophy may inform thought and belief, but everything does, everyone is capable of imagination and belief. I'm not quite sure what philosophy actually lays claim to, is it logic? Is it theories? Is it ideas?

Of course they had the capacity to test things. You think people, around Galileo's time, all of a sudden exclaimed "Bugger me! You can test things against the world!" Aristotle did some of that, after all. The problem was that much of the academic concern prior to that was more abstract, and in particular about various concepts and of God. Sure, there were some who doubted you could obtain true knowledge about the world of experience, but no one can really stick to that in everyday life.

If philosophy 'lays claim' to anything, I think it'd be the concepts that underpin what we believe about the world.

I meant they didn't have the technology to test out their ideas.

Anyway I'm not here to discredit philosophy, just one of the many people who don't get it and have no interest in it.

I don't think anyone would get on you about that. I just think some of us get irked when comments are made in the same vein as someone who got mad at physicists for not coming up with a new interpretation lf, say, Jane Eyre: it's kinda've a silly objection.

Forget it, I really don't care about this enough to get into a fight about it or commit into a lengthy discussion. I don't even have a position. I did write my previous posts with an attempt to have a discussion but I don't know enough to have a meaningful one.

[Napoléon]

Do you really think philosophical has never answered questions and just stops at inforimg them? I mean come on man. :/

Name one question philosophy has answered then.

[FreeTony]

Could it be argued that Philosophy is useful to formulate a decent scientific hypothesis, that can then be tested?

Something like Special Relativity was derived by Einstein saying "if the speed of light is the same in all frames, then this leads to these conclusions which make these testable predicitons". These testable predictions have since been tested and shown to be accurate, however it might not have been.

[Whateverist]

For those poor bastards like myself for whom the answer to every question isn't patently obvious, philosophy is required. That doesn't mean one must find their answer in some musty old book written by someone with a degree in philosophy. Really just the opposite. It means you yourself must engage in philosophizing unless you are willing to accept answers on authority. There is no getting around it but you are certainly permitted to call it something else and to go on misunderstanding what philosophy is about.

[là bạn điên]

I adore Philosophy and did a degree in it.

[MindForgedManacle]

Do you really think philosophical has never answered questions and just stops at inforimg them? I mean come on man. :/

Name one question philosophy has answered then.

Truth is correspondence between assertion and reality. Knowledge is a justified true belief. Reason is entirely guided by one's emotions. Talking of a world devoid of subjective experience is meaningless. Do I need to keep going?