"I think science should be more philosophical"
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
27-04-2012, 10:17 AM
RE: "I think science should be more philosophical"
Philosophy is highly useful to fuel a curious mind. Philosophy can aid in critical thinking. It is just damn interesting to discuss.

However, philosophy no longer has any business in science. The second you attempt to use philosophy to explain your science, you lose credibility. If you use science to explain your philosophy, you gain credibility.

In other words, keep your philosophy and science separated. They shouldn't mingle. What happens when you mingle them? You get a Michael Behe.

Philosophize about the world around you. It's wonderful to think about subjects like Love as the science behind that subject is rather dull (unless you're into human biology/neuroscience).

“We are all connected; To each other, biologically. To the earth, chemically. To the rest of the universe atomically.”

-Neil deGrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes NoahsFarce's post
27-04-2012, 04:33 PM
RE: "I think science should be more philosophical"
(27-04-2012 10:17 AM)NoahsFarce Wrote:  However, philosophy no longer has any business in science. The second you attempt to use philosophy to explain your science, you lose credibility. If you use science to explain your philosophy, you gain credibility.

I agree with that statement NoahsLark, but I don't agree with the implication that philosophy is somehow subservient or otherwise inferior to science. I don't want nearsighted scientists interpreting their results outside of the environment the results were obtained. Philosophers are best equipped to incorporate scientific theories and findings into our wider collective worldview. Scientists are not trained for that. I speak as a former Philosophy student who switched to Computer Science when wifey got preggo my Junior year and I realized that nobody's gonna pay my sorry ass enough to sit around and think deep thoughts to raise a family. In my experience in a research lab for my entire 27 year career, scientists tend to be too quick to dismiss philosophy out of hand while having little to no formal training in it themselves. It's kinda strange, 'cause it seems to be the only field they tend to be dismissive of. The lady doth protest too much, methinks.

As it was in the beginning is now and ever shall be, world without end. Amen.
And I will show you something different from either
Your shadow at morning striding behind you
Or your shadow at evening rising to meet you;
I will show you fear in a handful of dust.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-04-2012, 08:51 PM
RE: "I think science should be more philosophical"
(27-04-2012 04:33 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(27-04-2012 10:17 AM)NoahsFarce Wrote:  However, philosophy no longer has any business in science. The second you attempt to use philosophy to explain your science, you lose credibility. If you use science to explain your philosophy, you gain credibility.

I agree with that statement NoahsLark, but I don't agree with the implication that philosophy is somehow subservient or otherwise inferior to science. I don't want nearsighted scientists interpreting their results outside of the environment the results were obtained. Philosophers are best equipped to incorporate scientific theories and findings into our wider collective worldview. Scientists are not trained for that. I speak as a former Philosophy student who switched to Computer Science when wifey got preggo my Junior year and I realized that nobody's gonna pay my sorry ass enough to sit around and think deep thoughts to raise a family. In my experience in a research lab for my entire 27 year career, scientists tend to be too quick to dismiss philosophy out of hand while having little to no formal training in it themselves. It's kinda strange, 'cause it seems to be the only field they tend to be dismissive of. The lady doth protest too much, methinks.

I was not trying to imply that philosophy plays second fiddle to science. I love philosophy. I just want philosophy separated from science. Science deals with evidence and facts. Philosophy deals with that which are not readily verifiable. That is why philosophy is so highly subjective. You and I both know very well that this is the very reason why there are many schools of philosophy.

This is the same argument as keeping religion out of science. There is no room for that stuff. Your world view is irrelevant in science.

Now I do think scientists that philosophize are more well rounded. But it could also cause them to become stubborn. Einstein is a prime example. A completely orderly Universe was his philosophy and he died searching for a unified theory. He said of quantum theory "God does not play dice".

This is why I say keep the two separated. Kinda like this:

I love coffee.

I also love iced tea.

I would never mix the two, but will drink them equally as much.

“We are all connected; To each other, biologically. To the earth, chemically. To the rest of the universe atomically.”

-Neil deGrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes NoahsFarce's post
27-04-2012, 08:59 PM (This post was last modified: 27-04-2012 09:07 PM by GirlyMan.)
RE: "I think science should be more philosophical"
(27-04-2012 08:51 PM)NoahsFarce Wrote:  
(27-04-2012 04:33 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  I agree with that statement NoahsLark, but I don't agree with the implication that philosophy is somehow subservient or otherwise inferior to science. I don't want nearsighted scientists interpreting their results outside of the environment the results were obtained. Philosophers are best equipped to incorporate scientific theories and findings into our wider collective worldview. Scientists are not trained for that. I speak as a former Philosophy student who switched to Computer Science when wifey got preggo my Junior year and I realized that nobody's gonna pay my sorry ass enough to sit around and think deep thoughts to raise a family. In my experience in a research lab for my entire 27 year career, scientists tend to be too quick to dismiss philosophy out of hand while having little to no formal training in it themselves. It's kinda strange, 'cause it seems to be the only field they tend to be dismissive of. The lady doth protest too much, methinks.

I was not trying to imply that philosophy plays second fiddle to science. I love philosophy. I just want philosophy separated from science. ...

Philosophy's job is to integrate the sciences into a coherent collective worldview.

(27-04-2012 08:51 PM)NoahsFarce Wrote:  Philosophy deals with that which are not readily verifiable.

Philosophy deals with what the fuck verifiable even means. Wink

(27-04-2012 08:51 PM)NoahsFarce Wrote:  This is why I say keep the two separated. Kinda like this:

I love coffee.

I also love iced tea.

I would never mix the two, but will drink them equally as much.

If you mix them and add a little vodka, all is right with the world. Big Grin

As it was in the beginning is now and ever shall be, world without end. Amen.
And I will show you something different from either
Your shadow at morning striding behind you
Or your shadow at evening rising to meet you;
I will show you fear in a handful of dust.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes GirlyMan's post
28-04-2012, 01:18 PM
RE: "I think science should be more philosophical"
Lol! Your sir are a winner. Thumbsup

“We are all connected; To each other, biologically. To the earth, chemically. To the rest of the universe atomically.”

-Neil deGrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: