I suppose philosopy was always tightly connectected to science of the day, at least up to and including Whiteheads strange metaphysics. I'm not exactly sure what happened after that. What's the role of philosophy today? To me it looks like it's a mere "metascience", tool for understanding basics of other science, analyzing its own history etc. — Olento
The point of comparison would only apply to the topics these two disciplines have in common. For example, philosophy also discusses what logic is, there is also a philosophy of the mind, etc. My question is, for those topics, which method do you think would work best? (by best, I mean having a greater potential of being useful in other disciplines, or in the society). — Skalidris
Finding that out is also included in the search of truth progress — dimosthenis9
Person A is tortured, his rights denied, and ridiculed, because B thinks they know better. — Hillary
I don't see how this is relevant to seeking the truth — dimosthenis9
Views that are right are shunned, ridiculed, argumented to death, or banned... — Hillary
so that the bases of the discipline are experiments, which, in my opinion, is a more objective window to the world than any other tools. The first consequence of this is that it would exclude a lot of topics that can’t be related to sciences with logic. For example, there is no concept in sciences which can help discuss the existence of God, so this matter would be ignored, and maybe left out for philosophy. It would question things like the human behaviour in a broader picture than psychology, the mind, life, the nature of ethics, space, infinity, logic, … — Skalidris
Views that are based upon repeatable peer-reviewed scientific results? — creativesoul
I witness this in the very core of science. Views that are right are shunned, ridiculed, argumented to death, or banned, — Hillary
Are these things what science does??? And especially to "right views"?? Since when? — dimosthenis9
That depends on the people involved. — Hillary
Science can't pull itself up by it's bootstraps. That's the thing, one of the things, that philosophy is needed for. — T Clark
If you want to explain everything there is simply no way to do it through science. — chiknsld
you really seem to want is to limit philosophy to the scientific method — Tobias
You also neglect the fact that such a jump requires a lot of interpretation but how that is done remains unclear — Tobias
Your plea for independence in fact comes down to a plea for reductionism and dependence, limiting rather than expanding our avenues of thought — Tobias
OK, I have my chuckle for the day. — Rocco Rosano
I've completed my doctorate studies, and I just cringe when Karl Popper is mentioned. IF you understand Popper, THEN you are a level beyond me. — Rocco Rosano
If you mean someone who will come up with a revolutionary theory, I am not sure there will be one. The first requirement is NOT to work in a large group. Large groups need funding, and funding does not go to people playing in left field, and worse, large groups require group think.
The right stuff of today can turn out the wrong tomorrow. — Hillary
How is that relevant to "argument to death" or "banning" others as you say? — dimosthenis9
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.