Reminder that science is done best by people competent and respectful

>>1183931
Funny how every pic on the left is in black and white

You couldn't find a modern scientist saying anything nice about philosophy?

>>1183941
I would, except the guys on the left set the paradigm everyone in color reads about. So they don't really have anyone to compare to ;-)

>>1183969
Should have posted Hawking on the right.

File: Stephen_Hawking.StarChild.jpg (77KB, 250x359px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 250x359px

>At Google's Zeitgeist Conference in 2011, Hawking said that "philosophy is dead". He believes that philosophers "have not kept up with modern developments in science" and that scientists "have become the bearers of the torch of discovery in our quest for knowledge". He said that philosophical problems can be answered by science, particularly new scientific theories which "lead us to a new and very different picture of the universe and our place in it".[284]

>>1183931
>Pioneers in the devlovment of modern physics
vs
>Le atheism science is awsome crew
Wow no shit.

>>1183931
>Bill Nye
>Scientist
If I put on a lab coat and start setting off baking soda volcanoes at children's birthday parties will I also be a scientist?

>>1183931
top left, what the hell does atoms, particles, etc have to do with Plato's theory of forms? there is no particle of chair-ness

What's wrong with the Bill Nye quote? Being sceptical of such a thing is entirely reasonable.

>>1184100
>The only thing in philosophy is Nye's misunderstanding of Descartes
Kill yourself right now

>>1184102
Where in the hell did I say that?

Also, why does no one ever bring up the part from that video where he said "philosophy is important and its questions are interesting."

These threads always baffle me. "HURFDURF, WHY ISN'T PHILOSOPHY MORE RELEVANT, LET'S ACT LIKE INDIGNANT APES ABOUT IT, SURELY PEOPLE WILL CARE WHEN THEY SEE HOW INDIGNANT WE CAN BE ABOUT IT."

>>1184106
it seems like most philosophy posters are just pseudointellectuals that need to feel superior

>>1183931
>caring about "philosophy of science"

lmao.

Haven't you people got anything better to do? Like watch porn f.e.?

>>1183941
Michio Kaku?

>>1184132
why not compromise and read philosophy of porn?

File: Sam_Harris_2016.jpg (55KB, 1024x684px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 1024x684px

>>1183931
DESU I always meme'd Krauss hard because he is a weasley Jewish atheist marxist. But I didn't realize he was also fully retarded on Philosophy of Science.

Go figure the meme scientists hate philosophy becasue they can't understand it and the people who changed physics forever all understand it and what they do.

Honestly, Philosophy of Science was the the greatest courses I took in undergrad. Changed the way I think profoundly.

Good to know I have Bohr on myside specifically with that quote.

>I think you can see that Dawkins doesn't even understand the logic of the ontological argument, which moves from the logical possibility of God's existence to its actuality. A parody of the argument that moves from a logical impossibility to actuality is not parallel to the argument.

Dawkins chortles, "I've forgotten the details, but I once piqued a gathering of theologians and philosophers by adapting the ontological argument to prove that pigs can fly. They felt the need to resort to Modal Logic to prove that I was wrong" (God Delusion, p. 84). This is just embarrassing. The ontological argument is an exercise in modal logic—the logic of the possible and the necessary. I can just imagine Dawkins making a nuisance of himself at this professional conference with his spurious parody, just as he similarly embarrassed himself at the Templeton Foundation conference in Cambridge where he describes his confronting sophisticated philosophers and theologians with his flyweight objection to the teleological argument!

>>1184074
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xuQNt45Cjkc

File: kot2.jpg (205KB, 1124x1024px) Image search: [Google]

205KB, 1124x1024px

>>1184095

Back to undergrad you go

File: 1412452142821.jpg (5KB, 251x251px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 251x251px

>>1183931
>Left
Men that'll be remembered in 500 years
>Right
Meme scientists

I think the main reason the New Atheists don't like philosophy is because of shit like post-modernism and happenings like the Sokal Affair.

Problem is that they assume all modern philosophy is like that, and think they have an informed opinion on the subject because of it.

>>1184148
how are they related at all? Plato's forms weren't in our plane of existence and matter was just shadows of the forms. the closest parallel I can think of is gold and gold atoms giving the "goldness", but this has nothing to do with goldness on other planes of existence or other forms such as that for cups, chairs, and other human inventions

Here's a good takedown of Tyson
>https://samkriss.wordpress.com/2016/03/14/neil-degrasse-tyson-pedantry-in-space/

One good modern scientist who doesn't fall into the trap of scientism and positivism is Stephen Barr, a physics professor at the University of Delaware. He's a super smart guy and is also a devout Catholic. Would recommend his works if anyone wants to read a nuanced perspective of the interplay between faith and science.

>>1184074
>>He said that philosophical problems can be answered by science, particularly new scientific theories which "lead us to a new and very different picture of the universe and our place in it".
I think it was C.S. Lewis who said something like Freud was a very good psychoanalyst, but when he got outside of his field of expertise he started talking nonsense. That seems to be the case with so many scientists, at least popular ones today.

We don't have any great thinkers this generation

>>1184190
So, is scientism just "anyone who values science but doesn't believe in God" because your defining feature for that Barr fellow not being one seems to be that he's Catholic.

Well, that seems to confirm what I always suspected about these threads: they're a product of assmad theists.

>>1184190
>I think it was C.S. Lewis who said something like Freud was a very good psychoanalyst, but when he got outside of his field of expertise he started talking nonsense.
Kinda like when C.S. Lewis stepped outside his field of expertise in writing children's books

>>1184184
I think your misunderstanding actually stems from what Bohr's work is all about. Which is fine because most Physics professors, like Krauss in pic above, don't either.

Enjoy:

http://www.amazon.com/Atomic-Physics-Human-Knowledge-Dover/dp/0486479285

>>1184197
>So, is scientism just "anyone who values science but doesn't believe in God"

I think it's more that people who are scientists have a tendency to overexaggerate the scientific method's ability to give satisfactory answers to every single thing that happens in reality.

It's like a fetish for empiricism.

>>1184202
His field of expertise was Medieval Literature.

>>1184216
Well, it is one of the most succesfull methods in the history of humanity, so there is a reason.

>>1184220
No.

>>1184215
you're right, I don't. I was just going off of his quote, which seems nonsensical to me. maybe I was just taking him too literally as actually supporting Plato's theory of forms when he was just making a parallel to the theory of forms in his work

>>1184237
*to his work

>>1184237
You're also thinking way too big. Bohr isn't talking about atoms her. He's talking about smaller, and smaller units. And when you get into those units, they stop behaving like objects as we know them.

>>1183931
Out of all the left hand quotes, Bill Nye's seems to be the least offending.


Still, I can never bring myself to hate yhe guy.

>>1184220
Are you really that stupid?
There's no reason to expect the scientific method to answer things beyond how the natural world works

>>1184252
Bill Nye is a fucking moron that get over hyped because he pretended to be a scientist on tv

>>1184246
you mean stuff like the double slit experiment with photons? stuff that that is utterly bizzare but don't see how that leads to Plato's forms existing in some true reality

>>1184270
*stuff like that

>>1184254
I never made that claim, I was just saying that the scientific method has given such a broad framework of ideas, that I can understand why people would think of it as a universal method. You fucking triggered philosotard piece of shit.

>>1184216
So, would a radical empiricist like Hume qualify? Because he sure wasn't philosophically uneducated.

File: quantumleapretarded.gif (2MB, 240x180px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 240x180px

>>1184281
>, I was just saying that the scientific method has given such a broad framework of ideas, that I can understand why people would think of it as a universal method

>>1184254
I don't think he meant to imply that. he seems to be agreeing with you in part to me and saying that the success of science has perhaps made scientists get a little cocky

>>1184286
>So, would a radical empiricist like Hume qualify?

Absolutely. This is the guy that said every book in a library that contained information that wasn't based on sensory experience should be thrown on a fire and burned.

>>1184288
Trigger much faggot?

>>1184264
I wouldn't call him a moron, but he is exaggerated into a paragon of scientific knowledge, which is wholly undeserved.

>>1184288
not an argument

>>1184297
So, your complaint isn't that these people aren't philosophically educated, but that they aren't philosophically educated in a fashion you like. Well, we get to the meat of the matter, you're not some idle searcher of truth upset that others aren't concerned with it as you are, but a vicious ideologue upset that others don't agree with you.

You're a cunt.

>>1183931
>Philosophy n Plato n shit
Lol Heisenberg literally says that.

>>1183941
I mean, it's not like most of the guys on the right are very good scientists.

>>1184220
The scientific method is only successful at science. It has hasn't and not-withstanding semantic arguments about what theoretical physics is, by definition cannot justify anything and there for cannot produce knowledge. By definition, justification and production of knowledge is epistemology.

A poster above me pretty much nailed it. Scientism is 'fetishized empiricism'. That's a good way of putting it. It's taking empiricism and induction in doctrinal form like a religion would.

>>1183941
modern scientists of the caliber like that of the men on the left are not public intellectuals today. they are busy doing real work, unlike the idiot hacks on the right.

>>1184329
well Bill Nye isn't a scientist so...

>>1184310
Some of them are philosophically uneducated, not all of them.

The ones who are uneducated, tend to use their scientific worldview as a justification for speaking on subjects they have literally no knowledge about, which is the point I am talking about.

>>1184331

don't recall making that implication. consider spending more time reading books.

>>1184334
>which is the point I am talking about.

But this is demonstrably wrong, since your description of these people includes Hume, who was an incredibly influential philosopher.

>>1184336
it's just a stretch to call him a hack. he's done a good job at getting kids interested in science and tearing down Ken Ham

>>1184318
Before spouting what everyone already knows, try to understand the point given. The scientific method and its approach to problems in the natural world has changed humanity both technologically and philosophically. It doen´t necesarilly produce conrecte knowledge, but well, it still is sufficient for us to trust many things backed up by its methodology and it seems to work and from many people that is enough.

And you also made a really fucking bold claim which just draws on your ignorance of the subject.
>It has hasn't and not-withstanding semantic arguments about what theoretical physics
If you knew philosophy of science you would be ashamed of that claim. But welp, keep telling me how philosophers are just too stupid to explain why science works.

Dawkins, Krauss, and Tyson have done legit scientific work. Dont know about bill, but hes an engineer isint he?

Also bringing science to the public in relateble ways is a great thing imo.

File: 1427533462471.jpg (3KB, 120x125px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 120x125px

>>1183931
>mfw every single one in the right will most likely go to hell and there is nothing you can say and do that will steer them from this path

>>1184343
>who was an incredibly influential philosopher.

So what? Does being influential mean you must be correct?

>>1184356
This is not the thread to bring up religion in. It has nothing to do with it.

>>1184363
just sharing my thoughts

>>1184356
go worship the demiurge somewhere else

>>1184358
It doesn't mean he's correct, it just means that his position wasn't one outside of his area of knowledge. Your complaint here isn't these people speaking outside of their area of knowledge, but them speaking in a fashion that displeases you. My point is that you're a pissed off ideologue, no different from a raving fedora.

>>1184180
only reddit doesn't like postmodernism
muh leftist academia cultural Marxism go back basically

>>1184351
Bill is a TV personality who has become a science spokesman in recent years because of people's nostalgia for his show. Hasn't done any serious work in the field but he doesn't claim to.

>>1184375
>but them speaking in a fashion that displeases you.

Sure it displeases me, because it's autistic and retarded to say something doesn't real simply because there is no empirical evidence at that time, or that you can reduce everything in reality down to a mathematical equation.

These people literally don't know why they have the ideology they have even. I mean have you listened to Dawkins talk about politics, or even Bertrand Russell for that matter, which is an even better example of a person who thought that his social justice-tier liberal politics had a direct link to his mathematical and scientific ability.

>>1184392
But this isn't about them. This about figures like Hume, who I'm sure was well aware of why he believed what he believed.

Would it please you if Dawkins read more Hume and then said similar?

Again, these threads reek of someone butthurt that there are people who believe differently than they believe, which is laughably pathetic.

>>1184404
>Again, these threads reek of someone butthurt that there are people who believe differently than they believe

Which is literally the source of every conflict ever you faggot.

>>1183931
So why aren't you into science?

>>1184379
Many philosophers hate postmodernist who rely on heavy overuse of Hedel theorems or quantum whatever. This is even more cancerous than any Scientism could even hope to be.

>>1184392
>it's autistic and retarded to say something doesn't real simply because there is no empirical evidence at that time
But even Russell didn't think this. Just think of his example with the teapot. I can easily come up with an explanation that some aliens made teapots and sent one into space. of course just because we don't have evidence for the teapot it doesn't mean it doesn't exist

>>1184407
When it was centered around matters of ideology, rather than materialistic concerns, it was just as pathetic then.

>G-Guys philosophy is useful
>Sure it hasn't accomplished anything in 300 years but it totally isn't useless
>GUYS MY DEGREE IN PHILOSOPHY ISN'T USELESS

>>1184317
Now explain why they aren't good scientists

>>1184425
>"Muh utility" screams the overweight STEMfag as he has been without sex for the last 16 years

>>1184190
So they are like philosophers except philosophers talk nonsense in their field of expertise.

>>1184427
Do you think the overweight NEET philosophyfag has had more sex?

>>1184427
I actually just got laid today anon.
Amazing that you bring up the
>Hurr durr you are fat le virgin
Why not come up with a real argument? Of course you can't, you are a philosophy fag probably with a useless degree.

>>1184427
>acomplishment is the same as utility
Arn´t u supozed to v ggd at rhetorik

>>1184427
This is amazingly ironic since anyone who calls themselves a philosopher these days is a fat neckbeard.

>>1183931
Doesn't mean it's not a waste of time.

>>1184392
> I don't like it therefore its autistic and retarded!
Being able to reduce everything in the world into mathematical equation is a viable idea. It wasn't even new one in philosophy. Mathematics is no more than another language. If you can say that world can be described by words, it isn't a great autism to say the same for other formal system which are numbers and mathematical operators.

File: 1378916386218.jpg (49KB, 294x294px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 294x294px

>>1184436
>>1184437
>>1184439
>>1184442
I like all these (You)s.

Of course older scientists wouldn't be as critical of philosophy, its only now in the modern era we can see how useless it is thanks to everything science has done.

>>1184456
>I was only pretending to be retarded
Whatever you say anon.

File: 1384281271693.jpg (22KB, 274x306px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 274x306px

>>1184460
More like I enjoy all of you being triggered by the truth.

Name one thing philosophy has accomplished in the last 50 years.
In fact the Humanities in general are shit.

>>1184465
Nice argument. I see you came here to troll.
Well, nice bait. See you anon.

>>1184465
>triggered by the truth
but all you did was make a bait response without any substantive argument

>>1184474
It's bait 101 anon
>Say something retarded
>People make fun of you
>You are just mad at the truth lol

>>1184474
>without any substantive argument

Oh, you mean like this>>1184425

I mean, I just responded with the same coin.

>>1184351
>Dude like did you know that the earth is actually round and that a light year is actually a unit of distance and not time xD
That's the kind of "science" these faggots bring to the public
Shit everyone already knows

>>1184484
But that is an argument.
Philosophy hasn't accomplished anything in years.

>>1184481
I know, I'm just terrible at not taking bait

>>1184489
>I don't know anything about any of these people
Anon, why do you post shit?

>>1184489
>Shit everyone already knows
Flat Earthers and other assorted conspiratards exist.

>>1184489
>i'm gonna ignore the actual science each of these people have done because i'm an ignorant fuck and only think in memes and what other people tell me to think

>>1184497
I didn't you dumb nigger

>>1184467
Dawkins invented memes.

>>1184489
>Shit everyone already knows
well everyone besides the idiots they are responding to when they say that type of stuff. why do you have a problem with Tyson arguing with flat earthers or Bill Nye arguing with creationists?

>>1184503
>I didn't
Except you did.
You just showed that you don't know anything about any of them and care more about popculture shit than the science they actually did.

>>1184505
You are welcome.

>>1184493
>Philosophy hasn't accomplished anything in years.

Says you, because you think accomplishment means that you make a lot of money or build an new type of smartphone.

>>1184517
Ok anon, what has it accomplished recently?
Smart phones alone have changed the world more than philosophy has.

Tbh this thread right here is why atheist and theist are BOTH cancer on his
>guy says scientism is flawed and refers a Catholic scientist
>atheist chimps out and makes assanine accusations
>Soon everyone is shitposting down this tangent

>>1184517
No, something that pushed humanity forward.

>>1184517
Science effects people in substantial ways on a daily basis.

>>1184404
>Again, these threads reek of someone butthurt that there are people who believe differently than they believe, which is laughably pathetic.
You sound butthurt yourself, especially since you're trying to turn the direction of the thread against a single poster in your epic objective quest for truth.
>Some of them are philosophically uneducated, not all of them.
At least read what he wrote.

>>1184524
Catholic scientists doesn't disprove the fact that using logic and evidence is the best way to base your beliefs.

>>1184528
>Science effects people in substantial ways on a daily basis.
What you mean is "applied science" at best

>>1184534
>Applied science
>Doesn't know that science can easily become applied science later on
Dumb shit.

>>1184533
That doesn't excuse rampant shitposting and baseless accusations. Funny considering whoever started seemed pretty pissed themselves.

>>1184427
This. The fact that I'm a lab slave performing menial labor in the name of science means that my second rate mind is actually superior to that of Hegel. I'm such a scientist look at this iphone xD

>>1184534
>Geez anon, what's the point of knowing X, Y and Z? It will never be useful
>Years pass
>X,Y and Z are useful
>NOW IT'S APPLIED

>>1184521
Queer theory was invented.

>>1184526
>No, something that pushed humanity forward.

toplyl, forward to where anon? Extinction? Which also might happen you know, and science is vastly more likely to cause that than anything else.

>>1184537
>Science effects people in substantial ways on a daily basis.
This is what I was replying to. Scientific theory does not, sorry. Thanks for sperging out tho

>>1184552
>Scientific theory doesn't effect people
Are you retarded or just pretending to be?

>>1184545
Obvously, but the same could be said of philosophy.
>muh material objects
You are talking like a philistine.

>>1184550
You don´t know what science is.

>>1184552
Yeah, the chemical and physical theories that all modern devices are based on don't effect anyone.

>>1184555
It doesn't effect people on the daily basis. It's interesting that you science enthusiasts are always so illogical and erratic, mentally. It's almost as though you hide behind the material accomplishments of the field to mask your own shoddy little intellects famalam

>>1184556
How so?
Give me an example within the last 15 years.

>>1184560
>Yeah, the chemical and physical theories that all modern devices are based on don't effect anyone.
Why pull my words out of context? It's sort of pathetic. The fact is that you're referring to applied science.

>>1184561
>Modern technology doesn't effect people on a daily basis
Are you serious nigger?

> illogical and erratic
Trying to sound smart and yet you are obviously an idiot.

>>1184563
>Give me an example within the last 15 years.
Why would I conform to your arbitrary standards? lol nice try

>>1184565
You idiot, see
>>1184545
>>1184537


All science can become applied.

>>1184568
>Modern technology doesn't effect people on a daily basis
Didn't say that, you're slightly stupid tbqh

>>1184558
>You don´t know what science is.

I sure do. Science creates cancer treatment, just as much as it creates nuclear weapons.

If you think there's some way to control science, and to predict the ethical consequences of certain technologies before they emerge, you are mistaken, and that fact itself might mean the doom of us all one day.

>>1184569
>i'm not gonna think of an argument so there!
Ok anon.
Have fun being wrong then.

>>1184573
>All science can become applied.
Did I say otherwise? For the time being, theoretical science isn't changing our lives "every day." You're expanding my statement because your mind lacks precision.

>>1184574
You said
>It (scientific theory) doesn't effect people on the daily basis.
Technology relies on scientific theory.

How are you this stupid?

>>1184577
Is that what I said? Childish post

>>1184575
Science is not magical fairy pixie dust. Humans create nuclear weapons and humans are responsible of ti. Also you sound 14.

>>1184584
Theoretical science does effect your life every day you idiot because every bit of tech you own relies on theoretical science.

Philosophy cannot be just insulted so easily. I refuse to believe the patrons of a humanities board would not know the profound effects philosophy has had on the development of western thought and civilization, the very birthground of the reason they so applaud. In no other society, even the orient is the searc for cardinal truths so incentivized and praised as western Europe. This very trend comes from the tireless Augustine scholastics, who searched wildly for truth. Yet people here will laugh off philosophy as contributing nothing? Do not mistake me I will not say science is impotent. It has elevated man to New heights of prosperity. But it does not replace the ideals, morality, or spirituality of philosophy and theology.

>>1184590
>I'm not gonna argue
Come on anon, give an example of how philosophy is important in the modern world. If you can't then it obviously isn't.

>>1184588
Yes, but you're being pathetic and pedantic. With that piss poor logic, philosophical theory effects people on a daily basis.
And anyway, that is applied science, it is quite far from metaphysical theories...

>>1184597
>Come on anon, give an example of how philosophy is important in the modern world. If you can't then it obviously isn't.
The scientific method, moral theories, political science

>>1184593
Okay then you pedantic faggot.

Humans use science to create nuclear weapons because they are afraid of each other.

Imagine for a second the next time humanity gets into a conflict that even comes close to the Second World War?

We'll all be dead.

>>1184598
>philosophical theory effects people on a daily basis.
Give examples faggot.
>Metaphysical theories
Do you know what metaphysics means anon?
Stop using big words you don't understand.
Science does deal with Metaphysics you idiot.

>>1184602
>Modern time
Ok, so the only important thing philosophy has done recently is when it's actually science?

>>1184603
That is a completely different statement. You could even argue that the motif behind those actions are based on philosophy. Science is an amoral method.

>>1184603
>Doesn't know Nukes are the reason humanity hasn't gotten into a new world war

>>1184606
>Give examples faggot.
I should think it's obvious.
>Do you know what metaphysics means anon?
Science can inform metaphysics. What do you think Heisenberg was on about? durr

>>1184602
Even if you say that science is philosophy then the argument becomes
>The only good type of philosophy is science

>>1184618
Holy shit you are an idiot. No one brought up metaphysics since it has nothing to do with science. You are showing that scientific theory has nothing to do with the world and then incorrectly used the word metaphysics.
You are such a stupid fedora using words he doesn't understand.

>>1184611
Political science isn't important? Linguistics isn't important? I guess it isn't important if your definition of that word includes only technology.

>>1184618
>Science can inform metaphysics.
Ok, but that doesn't make it science. Why did you bring up metaphysics exactly? Seems to me you don't know what metaphysics mean.

>>1184624
Linguistics isn't a philosophy you idiot.

>>1184613
>Science is an amoral method.

Which is precisely why it can create weapons of mass destruction, because science is simply a tool to gain power of the natural world.

You can have as I said, cancer treatments which could be used for good, or you can have Dr. Mengele tier shit, because it's just a tool, and it depends upon the person wielding it.

>>1184622
>Even if you say that science is philosophy then the argument becomes
No, it doesn't. You expect me to simply give int o such stupid assertions? kek
> No one brought up metaphysics since it has nothing to do with science
You mean besides the OP? durr
>e. You are showing that scientific theory has nothing to do with the world and then incorrectly used the word metaphysics.
This sentence is pure nonsense lel
>You are such a stupid fedora using words he doesn't understand.
I'm mostly quoting Heisenberg. It's good to know that's what you think of him- surely you're superior to him

>>1184624
Linguistics is a science anon.

>>1184616
Yeah and what do you think will happen when some terrorist organization lets off a nuke in a major city in a Western country, that kills a 100000+ people?

Just let the collective shitstorm of that scenario marinate in your head for a second, considering the reaction to 9/11.

>>1184631
>All that no argument
Nigger, you said that scientific theory doesn't effect people on the day to day and you were proven wrong.

>>1184627
>Ok, but that doesn't make it science. Why did you bring up metaphysics exactly? Seems to me you don't know what metaphysics mean.
To illustrate that I was talking about highly abstract theory, when I said that scientific theory doesn't effect our daily lives.
>>1184629
Wittgenstein wasn't a philosopher?

>>1184630
But then it´s not "science´s fault" you moron.
>>1184624
Those are subjects that branched out of philosophy like any other subject in the world.

>>1184631
Why bring up metaphysics when it has nothing to do with scientific theory?
>>1184642
Abstract theory is not metaphysics.

>>1184641
>assert something with no support
>"why didn't you respond to my incoherent gibberish with an argument xD"
kek
>Nigger, you said that scientific theory doesn't effect people on the day to day and you were proven wrong.
You're taking things out of context. The advancement of theory isn't really effecting anyone on a daily basis.

>>1184630
Dr. Mengele accomplished nothing from his bizzare experiments. all he did was torture twins while calling it science

>>1184642
Literally every applied science is based on abstract theory. How do you not understand this?
>>1184647
>The advancement of theory isn't really effecting anyone on a daily basis.
Except the technology based on it you idiot.

>>1184647
>He thinks technology isn't based on theory
kek, everyone laugh at this retard.

>>1184646
>Abstract theory is not metaphysics.
Did I say it was? You're damn sloppy.
>Why bring up metaphysics when it has nothing to do with scientific theory?
I explained that quite clearly. Perhaps it was clumsy, but you shouldn't be so desperate in your arguments

>>1184649
>Except the technology based on it you idiot.
Okay, what theoretical advancement was made today that changed your life?
>>1184651
>he can't read
kek, everyone laugh at this retard

>>1184648
Edison didn't accomplish anything when he made 999 different non-functioning lightbulbs either.

>>1184653
>Desperate
Coming from the idiot bringing up unrelated shit like Metaphysics.
The theory of evolution, gravity, special relativity, ect effect your life at least a dozen times a day.

>>1184657
>Okay, what theoretical advancement was made today that changed your life?
Holy shit you are an idiot.
>Hurr durr if it doesn't effect your life the exact same day it was discovered it doesn't count
Amazing moving the goalpost stupid.

>>1184657
Well ok anon, what philosophy that was just invented 5 minutes ago effect your life hurr durr

>>1184664
>Hurr durr if it doesn't effect your life the exact same day it was discovered it doesn't count
That's what I've been saying from the start. If you don't like it, don't dispute it.
>>1184660
>The theory of evolution, gravity, special relativity, ect effect your life at least a dozen times a day.
Yes, but you're getting stupidly abstract now. The applied theories do effect us, but change to the theories do not effect us every day. With that logic, philosophy effects us ever day.

>All professional philosophers die
>World becomes a better place because the most cancerous faggots in higher learning are gone

>All professional scientists die
>Suddenly all 1st world countries collapse

>>1184659
It's not even comparable. Dr. Mengele literally was just "What will happen if I inject this shit in this girl's eye XDXDXD"

>>1184669
> but change to the theories do not effect us every day.
Yes they do. Just because they don't effect you the day they happened doesn't mean they don't. You really are stupid.

>>1184673
The only reason that kind of tinkering seems weird to you is because it was done on humans.

This is literally how experiments are done daily on mice and other animals.

>>1184666
>Well ok anon, what philosophy that was just invented 5 minutes ago effect your life hurr durr
It's your fault for attempting to defend a point as stupid as your tryhard little exaggeration

>>1184669
>That's what I've been saying from the start.
What a shit fucking argument anon.
Still doesn't change the fact that modern science has done near everything for us and modern philosophy has done near nothing.

>>1184681
Except no one made the stupid strawman you created.

>>1184678
>Yes they do. Just because they don't effect you the day they happened doesn't mean they don't.
Prove it.
>You really are stupid.
Man, you're desperate lad. Nice ad hom shit

>>1184180
Most of what they are saying is pretty postmodern bro, at least postenlightenment and postromantic

>>1184672
Nobody is denying that scientists and science is useful.

But you still need to realize that there has to be a moral, and ontological framework behind it, that cannot be justified by science itself, else you get shit like the Hiroshima bombings, and people like Dr. Mengele, and the Unit-731 that Japan were doing on Chinese civilians.

>>1184686
>Prove it
The changed evolutionary theory that account for things like genetics are the foundation of modern anti bacterial medicine.

>>1184682
>What a shit fucking argument anon.
Then defeat, don't mischaracterize it out of pure desperation.

>>1184690
Except you don't need philosophy majors to tell me killing children is bad.

>>1184680
actually no. you are correct that it is possible to do scientific testing that is in flagrant violation of human rights but that was not what Mengele did. all he did was randomly torture twins and then disect them

>>1184693
>Defeat my argument that proves nothing
No one here is arguing that every scientific theory effects the world same day. Only that modern science is far more important than modern philosophy.

>>1184684
>Except no one made the stupid strawman you created.
Then he was comparing iphones to Hegel? lol
>>1184691
>The changed evolutionary theory that account for things like genetics are the foundation of modern anti bacterial medicine.
Okay, how did change your life every day this week? Provide an example for each day.

>>1184314
His mother was an ancient languages scholar and he grew up reading Plato in the Greek.

>>1183931
But the Bill Nye quote is perfectly reasonable. The only thing that makes him sound smug is the extreme smugness in that picture, the same way if you put any Voltaire quote next to a picture of Voltaire.

>>1184701
Iphones did not change the world the exact same day someone built one you idiot.
>>1184701
Literally every single technology is based on modern changes to computer science.
The food I eat today would not exist without modern evolutionary and genetic theory.

>>1184696
>Except you don't need philosophy majors to tell me killing children is bad.

Maybe not you specifically, but since it has happened in the past, somebody obviously needs to tell people.

>>1184700
>Only that modern science is far more important than modern philosophy.
Depends on what you're considering

>>1184701
>Retard doesn't realize he is on a computer

>>1184706
>Iphones did not change the world the exact same day someone built one you idiot.
I'm not arguing this. I said every day, not same day. durr

>>1184709
>>Retard doesn't realize basic reading comprehension is important

>>1184708
Actual important things like the technology our world runs on.
Modern philosophy of say the last 20 years did very little unless you can give an example i'm not thinking of that rivals modern tech.

I'm finishing up a physics degree, will probably go to a grad school, although I'm not sure what I want to study.

I'm disgusted by the schism between the humanities and sciences, and with myself as well because I bought into it. The humanities kind of brought it on themselves though. When my grandpa went to university, he studied the classics. When I had to take my arts courses, I had to study feminist articles about post-9/11 America. You say there isn't a political bias, but it's pretty obvious. Why is academia so oikophobic?

>>1184409
I am.

>>1184707
>somebody obviously needs to tell people.
yes, but philosophy majors aren't the somebody that's needed. utilitarianism has not stopped a sociopath from murdering someone

>>1184713

See >>1184657


>>1184714
This is ironic since you obviously are too stupid to understand that the computer you are on wouldn't exist without modern scientific advancement.

>>1183931

OP thats because todays so called "scientists" who cant even hold a candle to their predecessors are anti religion bigots who listen to satans lies.

>>1184723
>Everyone involved in war crimes, or horrible acts in general must necessarily be a sociopath

Read a book faggot.

>>1184715
>Actual important things like the technology
kek, typical philistine
>Modern philosophy of say the last 20 years did very little unless you can give an example i'm not thinking of that rivals modern tech.
Technology is better for "important things like technology" than science
wow that's fucking deep, topkek fedora

>>1184713
Iphones do effect me every day since I use to it call people.

>>1184704
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ROe28Ma_tYM

Except it's not, he's saying his senses are totally accurate, which Schrodinger directly contradicts him on. Your senses do not report the world accurately.

>>1184725
>This is ironic since you obviously are too stupid to understand that the computer you are on wouldn't exist without modern scientific advancement.
I didn't say otherwise. This is ironical since you're obviously too stupid to read basic English.

>>1184731
>Uses words like philistine to feel smart
>Calls others fedora
kek

>>1184738
>Uses words like philistine to feel smart
You consider philistine to be a difficult word? lel

>>1184731
>>1184737
Amazing how these idiots have to go to name calling instead of making an argument.

>>1184730
fuck off, I was not saying that

>>1184742
>Amazing how these idiots
You should have made an argument, tbqh
typical bourgeois philistine

>>1184741
Are you going to come up with an argument or tip your fedora some more?

>>1184744
You can't deal with stem austist. Virginity does weird things to the brain.

>>1184749
Argument to ad hom shit? lol sure thing

>>1184745
>Still no argument
Science has effected the world infinitely more than philosophy has. The fact that you have to use pathetic name calling instead of an argument actually proves it.

>>1184751
>Philosophy fag calling someone a virgin
kek
Still no argument.

>>1184754
Are you going to show how philosophy is useful?

>>1184744
Look, fag, I agree with you that a philosophy major isn't going to stop a nuclear attack, but that's not what I said either.

I said we need, as a species of primates, a moral and ontological framework, that can cope with the insanely rapid advance of technology.

Do you really think that humans are equipped to deal with being cyborgs and technological mutants in the future, without some corresponding social system that can handle it? I don't think so, and I think the likelihood is that we will destroy ourselves in pursuit of good ends(making our lives better).

>>1184755
>Science has effected the world infinitely more than philosophy has.
>science has effected the world infinitely more than what led to its very existence
stupid post
>The fact that you have to use pathetic name calling instead of an argument actually proves it.
what? lol

>>1184765
Don't tell me you believe that you need philosophyfags for morality to exist.

>>1184764
>Are you going to show how philosophy is useful?
I have already, clown.

>>1184767
>Philosophytard trying to take credit for science

>>1184768
>Don't tell me you believe that you need philosophyfags for morality to exist.
He never said that, imbecile stemclown

>>1184773
Where?
>>1184777
>Using stem as an insult
Kek

>>1184774
>Philosophytard trying to take credit for science
>renames an branch of philosophy "science"
>maintains his virginity
>thinks this is an argument

>>1184767
The only decent thing it has done.
It's like giving a dad the credit for having a smart son who does everything.

>>1184778
>Using doritos and mountain dew as a meal

>>1184780
>An branch
Kek, nice english faggot.
If science is a branch of philosophy than it is the only useful branch.
At least the only useful branch in the last 50 years.

>>1184785
>The only decent thing it has done.
Besides political science, psychology, ethical theories, etc

>Philosophyfags can't think of a single example of philosophy being useful
>Resort to name calling
I guess I would be mad too if I had a useless degree.

>>1184794
Psychology is a branch of science. Ethical theories have done piss all in years.

>>1184791
>At least the only useful branch in the last 50 years.
But it hasn't taught you how to lose your virginity
>than
Kek, nice english faggot

>>1184780
why do you have an obsession with the sex life of other anons?

>>1184789
>>1184804
>Le fedora
>I STUDY PHILOSOPHY BUT YOU ARE THE FEDORA
It's amazing how butthurt people get when they lose an argument.

>>1184802
>Psychology is a branch of science.
Freud was a scientist? fucking kek

File: 1387284409357.png (6KB, 252x256px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 252x256px

>>1184797

>>1184805
How can I obsess over what doesn't exist?

>>1184780
>Hurr durr I called him a virgin everyone
>On a japanese image board!

>>1184809
well a pseudoscientist

>>1184809
No and that is why he got everything wrong.

>>1184813
>namecalling
shit post

>>1184797
Nobody needs to argue anything, scientists who accomplished more than any retard on 4chan ever will saw it as useful. I'm here to mock you, not to argue that I'm right, because I am scientifically.

>>1184812
i don't know, you tell me

>>1184812
You know anon, obsessing over other people having sex is a sign of being a cuck, you know that right?

>>1184815
>well a pseudoscientist
lol, you're stretching definitions quite desperately
>>1184816
Yeah, he's only the father of modern psychology. topkek

>>1184820
>Argument from authority
Kek.

>>1184820
>I'm here to mock you, not to argue that I'm right, because I am scientifically.
kek, this autismposting is gold

Science can't tell us what's right or wrong. Philosophy is what's used to navigate things like foreign policy and economics. Tell me the correct action we should take in regards to let's say ISIS or refugees using only science and no philosophy, for instance.

>>1184823
>Yeah, he's only the father of modern psychology
no one uses his methods. he is only the father of modern psychology in that he is the only name in the field that you know

>>1184838
>no one uses his methods
They use his theories, virgin
> he is only the father of modern psychology in that he is the only name in the field that you know
Ah, so most modern psychologists are lying and you know better.

>>1184833
>Is blank a correct theory
>Yes, you are right
I know what you mean but

>>1184820
>I didn't want to argue or anything after you proven me wrong

>>1184842
modern psychologists aren't psychoanalysts you retard

I see Nye's quote as subtly very funny, I hope intentionally. "Is something that I am skeptical of" as in he's skeptical of the sceptic argument

>>1184848
No one said they were, fedora

>>1184090
you dumb little retarded fuck

>>1184854
>Fedora
I ain't even that anon but it's clear someone ran out of arguments if they have to call someone a neckbeard on 4chan of all places.

>TFW the theory of evolution alone has done more to tell us about our place in the universe than all of philosophy has ever done

>>1184854
that is the very thing you were implying. modern psychology has rejected nearly everything Freud has ever said. psychology was using the scientific method before Freud came along and has continued to do so

>philosophy but no science
>live a full, intelligent life
>science but no philosophy
>live a long shallow life without meaning
>but at least you have le iphone
topcuck

I prefer a short life of great width to an narrow one sans depth, sorry virgins

>>1184876
>intelligent
>I don't want to look at facts or evidence
>I'm smart everyone!

>>1184876
>My subjective bullshit is more deep than the realities of our universe

>>1184876
>philosophyfag calling someone else a virign
The irony is amazing.

>>1184858
>I ain't even that anon but it's clear someone ran out of arguments if they have to call someone a neckbeard on 4chan of all places.
I'm supposed to respond to strawmen with something else? dumb post tbqh
>>1184869
>modern psychology has rejected nearly everything Freud has ever said.
He's extremely influential, even today.
>psychology was using the scientific method b
basic logic =/= scientific method

>>1184863
And what is 'our place in the universe', STEMlord?

>>1184857

Bill Nye is a Boeing engineer who started out doing instructional videos in house and graduated to a children's series on KCTS. Also for what it's worth, everyone in Magnolia thinks he's an unlikable cunt.

>>1184879
>>1184885
>>1184889
???

>>1184876
Ok anon, have fun shoveling mud in a hut.
>>1184893
Is calling someone a lord supposed to be an insult?

File: becheerfulandenjoylife.jpg (92KB, 645x344px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 645x344px

>>1183931
thank you

>>1184351
Nye is a vulgarisator by profession.

Something that is needed, admired, but that is in now way groundbreaking in any aspect.

>>1184891
>he is extremely influential
So? What does that have to do with anything?

>>1184903
*not

>>1184896
>no philosophyfags
>No feminists
>College and higher learning would be great again
>No philosophy fags on /his/
Can't wait anon.

>>1184736
You're projecting. That's not what being said at all. You're upset that you feel he isn't giving the due reverence for philosophy. He said the senses are real, and sense real things, not that they're accurate. This is really pathetic on your part.

He's a pragmatist, which is an actual philosophical position that's not pure positivism. He's saying while Hume reducing things to ridiculous levels might be interesting, they don't make much of a difference in real life, I'm pretty sure Hume expected the sun to rise most days. That's what his hammer thing is about. He's asking you if you believe in those ideas to a threshold where you will repeatedly drop a hammer on your foot. The answer for most is no, they'll take the pragmatist option, even if they'll entertain more philosophical ideas in their head.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pragmatism

>>1184891
>He's extremely influential, even today.
not in modern psychology he isn't

>>1184925
This. Imagine what would happen to a modern psychology student quoting that faggot.

Why do people get majors in philosophy any way? Is it so they can shitpost on 4chan without a job?

Nearly all philosophy is subjective and therefore useless since anyone's belief is just as important as anyone elses.
Any 15 year old is as correct as someone who has been studying philosophy for 30 years.

>>1184215
>physicist doing philosphy
Bohr was being no better than the men on the right side of picture.

>>1184924
>He said the senses are real, and sense real things, not that they're accurate.
"What you sense and feel is not authentic" in the sense you mean then nobody would say. Even the most ardent idealist says, the way you sense and feel things is how you sense and feel them, it's tautologous and not a point. That's not what Bill Nye was saying, Bill Nye was saying your senses accurately get at the nature of things, which is the only interesting thing to be said about sense data. You're the one projecting and defending indefensible ideas because of your love fetish with an ignorant tard.

>>1184925
That's because modern psychology is infested with statistical data studies that endlessly unrepeatable and worthless.

>>1184924
Like, just try reading through Hume and Kant, and you just may get an understanding of why Bill Nye is being a fucking retard in what he's saying. Maybe you're so massively ignorant you don't understand the problems with saying "the senses are accurate", and if you knew anything about pragmatism you would have read William James who shits all over the idea of authentic senses. William James would shit all over Bill Nye to hell and back.

Like, you're in over your head. You don't know what the fuck you're talking about, just like every other STEMlord, you don't even know how to make sense of a philosophical statement because you only have one way to interpret anything.

>>1184955
>he's saying his senses are totally accurate
This is literally you projecting.

>"What you sense and feel is not authentic" in the sense you mean then nobody would say. Even the most ardent idealist says, the way you sense and feel things is how you sense and feel them
This isn't even true at all. Have you even studied philosophy? Lots of people would say it. It's another issue if anyone would live their life by it.

>it's tautologous and not a point.
That's his opinion on much of philosophy.

>That's not what Bill Nye was saying, Bill Nye was saying your senses accurately get at the nature of things, which is the only interesting thing to be said about sense data.
Compare this to the quote at the top of this post, and notice where you were projecting and backpedaling.

>You're the one projecting and defending indefensible ideas because of your love fetish with an ignorant tard.
Pathetic.

So did all of the philosophyfags leave?
I guess they couldn't defend their useless shit.

>>1184966
>This is literally you projecting.
That's what he fucking said you mongoloid.

>This isn't even true at all. Have you even studied philosophy? Lots of people would say it. It's another issue if anyone would live their life by it.
Kant is still hugely influential in physics and Kant said we have no idea what the noumenal (world-in-itself) would actually look like, because everything is filtered through our senses. We don't look at the way the world actually is.

>That's his opinion on much of philosophy.
Which is why he's a moron.

>Compare this to the quote at the top of this post, and notice where you were projecting and backpedaling.
Nobody is projecting. Every physicist who knows quantum physics says it changes your perspective on nature. Bill Nye doesn't know quantum physics in the slightest.

If you actually knew any philosophy you would understand that I'm right, but you don't, and you're doing exactly what the morons on the right do, say stupid shit and get assblasted and defensive when someone tells you to be quiet where one cannot speak.

>>1184973
Maybe you're just acting like a moron?

File: 1462179538187.png (126KB, 1079x2143px) Image search: [Google]

126KB, 1079x2143px

Science > Philosophy

This proves it

>>1184977
Nice butthurt. I guess that answers the question.

>>1184419
ahh, a positivist ignoring the fact that he is one, and pretending his ideology has no weight in his autistic outbursts because he isn't even aware of it.
like pottery

>>1184982
>physics students obsessively practice iq tests because they're nervous they might not be the smartest people around

>>1184982
this is by far the most cringe worthy shit I've seen today

>>1184963
>Like, just try reading through Hume and Kant, and you just may get an understanding of why Bill Nye is being a fucking retard in what he's saying.
>implying I haven't
No, you're a retard for thinking that Hume and Kant are required to live life in a pragmatic way, because you're used to pulling them out against positivists. He said what you sense and feel is likely authentic. He didn't say senses were authentic. He said he believed senses are a real thing, and the things they sense are real. He never even said he had proof. This you you projecting. He said he was skeptical, not a complete denial.

>Like, you're in over your head. You don't know what the fuck you're talking about, just like every other STEMlord, you don't even know how to make sense of a philosophical statement because you only have one way to interpret anything.
You are literally projecting, and as expected, you think everyone is a diehard positivist.

>>1184982
How do they have such shit SATs?

File: 1442628790123.jpg (46KB, 409x415px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 409x415px

>>1184808
>lose an argument.
kek, you don't even have an argument
You are drinking the objectivity kool aid way too much

>>1184906
It's literally the crux of our conversation

>>1184975
>That's what he fucking said you mongoloid.
No it isn't. Watch your own fucking video.

>Kant is still hugely influential in physics and Kant said we have no idea what the noumenal (world-in-itself) would actually look like, because everything is filtered through our senses. We don't look at the way the world actually is.
Irrelevant and attempting to move the argument away from your bullshit.

>Which is why he's a moron.
That's just your opinion that anyone who does not hold philosophy in the highest regard is a moron. Don't worry, he considers you a moron too.

>Nobody is projecting. Every physicist who knows quantum physics says it changes your perspective on nature. Bill Nye doesn't know quantum physics in the slightest.
You didn't even watch your video or listen to the words. You just filtered what you heard through your own biases and heard "POSITIVISMPOSITIVISMPOSITIVISMPOSITIVISMPOSITIVISMPOSITIVISM"

>If you actually knew any philosophy you would understand that I'm right, but you don't, and you're doing exactly what the morons on the right do, say stupid shit and get assblasted and defensive when someone tells you to be quiet where one cannot speak.
Your entire premise is based upon a false quote. And you wonder why he doesn't like people like you. You're probably the faggot that asked him the question and are still butthurt about it to this day.

>hurr durr im right

>>1184999
Except objectivity is the exact opposite of "the kool aid"

>>1184925
Yes, he fucking is.

>>1184992
>No, you're a retard for thinking that Hume and Kant are required to live life in a pragmatic way
Yes, I agree, for your common dumbass studying philosophy is pointless. The point of the thread is about groundbreaking physics and science.

>He said what you sense and feel is likely authentic.
Yes, and actual pragmatic philosophers tell you time and time again this is retarded. William James systematically destroys this notion in his works on psychology. Your senses are not authentic. For instance, if you stand on train tracks going into the distance, your eye always reports that the train tracks converge and touch. Every time. You have to mentally tell yourself that train tracks don't work that way, and impose a metaphysical belief onto the system.

You're always correcting mistakes your senses make, you just do it so often you don't realize you're making them. Important scientists, people who make discoveries that matter actually recognize this, retards like you stamp your feet and yell.

>He didn't say senses were authentic.
At 1:28, he say explicitly that your senses are real things. He says it explicitly, directly. You're the one twisting words to mean a hunk of bullshit.

Even the most ardent idealist argues that senses exist and have meaning.

>He said he believed senses are a real thing, and the things they sense are real.
He doesn't say the latter, he says nothing about the things being sensed, he talks about his senses only, explicitly the five senses.

>He never even said he had proof.
At least he's not moronic enough to say that.

>This you you projecting. He said he was skeptical, not a complete denial.
You keep bringing up projecting, as if I'm guilty of what Bill Nye is saying? You're using the word wrong and it makes you look like a retard.

>You are literally projecting, and as expected, you think everyone is a diehard positivist.
That's because Bill Nye is suggesting that world view very strongly.

File: Seanmcarroll2.jpg (22KB, 269x302px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 269x302px

>>1183931
Which side does Sean Carroll fall under?

Carroll is an atheist. He turned down an invitation to speak at a conference sponsored by the John Templeton Foundation, on the grounds that he did not want to appear to be supporting a reconciliation between science and religion.[11] In 2004, he and Shadi Bartsch taught an undergraduate course title at the University of Chicago on the history of atheism. In 2012 he organized the workshop "Moving Naturalism Forward", which brought together scientists and philosophers to discuss issues associated with a naturalistic worldview.
>He likes to watch Pokémon because the main character Ash Ketchum is depicted as an atheist as Ash Ketchum was never seen practicing a religion (including Christianity) in the show
>Carroll received an "Emperor Has No Clothes" award at the Freedom From Religion Foundation Annual National Convention in October 2014.

>>1185002
you said nothing of substance. bill nye is absolutely suggesting a positivist interpretation of the world, and is absolutely arguing against philosophical strawmen. calm your tits bubba, your autism is overweening.

File: 1461960762598.png (1MB, 1600x1200px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1600x1200px

>>1185003
"objectivity" can only be attained in the endeavour of data input/output through the scientiffic method, and it results only in further data, little nuggets of information that must be further interpreted, necesarilly by a human mind and thus beyond what could truly be "objective", as the term is in itself an idea.

>>1184616
no, the political realities of globalization are why we dont have world wars.....becuase world wars in the first world wreck ecoomies and socioties and inconvinience everyone terribly.....its our populations addiction to modern life that prevents world wars

sure nuclear weapons are scary, but campaignes of sustained bombing are also scary and still happen

>>1185024
You are literally misquoting him and basing all your strawman arguments on a false quote. This is the sound of you backpedaling and sounding like a smug pseudo-philosophical ass.

This is why STEMfags hate us.

>>1183941
>>1183931
Anon is making a good point, OP
You could've put Carl Sagan in there for some balance

>>1185064
you're just wrong. i'm not misinterpreting the quote at all.

File: wewwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww.gif (174KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

174KB, 300x300px

>>1185064
>caring about STEMfags

>>1185077
>Caring about the people who let the modern world you live in possible

>>1185075
Yes you are. It's not the STEMfag's fault when you come off like a smug pretentious ass when you filter everything they say as "muh positivism"

>But the idea that reality is not real or what you sense and feel is not authentic is something I’m very skeptical of.
He's skeptical. He did not say outright that it was false. He didn't saying philosophy is wrong.

>I mean I think that your senses,
He thinks this is the case.

>the reality that you interact with with light, heat, sense of touch, taste, smell, hearing, absolutely hearing. These are real things.
He says that your senses reflect, not necessarily accurately, real things that actually exist. These are his thoughts. He is skeptical of the alternative.

>>1185090
>Unwarranted self importance
what will you do when you see your daughters being raped by the uncaring masses?

>>1185098
>having daughters

>>1185097
>He says that your senses reflect, not necessarily accurately, real things that actually exist.
That's not what he says. You're just wrong. It's comical at this point that you're still trying to argue this.

>>1185077

>I don't care about the modern world
Why not live in a forest then?

>>1185105
>That's not what he says.
What does he say? Where does he say your senses are 100% accurate, and this is a fact grounded in positivism?

>>1185107
>STEMfags
>Not a dime a dozen
I love how you always asusme yourselves personally responsible for technological progress

>>1185114
That's fumy because STEMfags cost many more dimes than a philosopher in the job market.

>>1185114
>Dime a dozen
You mean humanities and liberal arts majors anon.
> love how you always asusme yourselves personally responsible for technological progress
I never said this. In fact I am not even a STEM major.
But you definitely should care about what people who decide what the world around you will operate like thinks.

>>1185118
kek

>>1185125
>Denying facts

>>1185114
>Who cares what the most educated people on earth think

>>1185127
I'm not him I was just laughing at him.

File: 1452742876259.jpg (18KB, 400x300px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 400x300px

>>1185118
>>1185123
all the smugness of the world elites, yet none of their actual power
pottery I say

>>1185123
Definitely should care. I'm about to finish a top 10 stem program and disturbing portion of my peers want things like goverment mass surveillance.
These represent the people who will help make these systems in coming decades.

>>1185118
>stemfags
>in demand

most stem fields are overcrowded with people chasing the money, lol

>>1185136
I swear to god this. STEMfags have no sense of ethics (which is why they have to take ethics class), it's just about making something work within a given context, and dumb pretentious psuedo-intellectual philosophy faggots more concerned about the war on positivist scientism only make this worse.

>>1185141
>overcrowded
>chasing money
>money is demand

File: 1461053454230.png (238KB, 700x537px) Image search: [Google]

238KB, 700x537px

>>1185129
>this is what stemfags actually believe
If anything you are the living examples of intellectually crippling overpsecialization, just look at what this tool believes
>>1185136

>>1185152
Philosophy fags are far worse considering most of them are leftist SJWs and idiots.

>>1185158
>B-But they have different beliefs than me
Kek, sorry people think differently than you.

Also >>1185160

>>1185152
>Ethics
>not subjective and useless
I once took a business Ethics class. I know for a fact the people there didn't give a shit about it.
It pretty much is
>Don't be a dick but we can't say for sure what is and isn't a dick because it's subjective

>>1185158
It's far better to know a lot about a few things than nothing about everything.
See humanities majors.

File: 502.jpg (44KB, 569x802px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 569x802px

>>1185160
Wouldn't it be idiotic to assume such things of an entire section of the academia, on a global scale, and whose depth spans literal millenia based around mostly anglo tendencies and /pol/ memes?
You have no idea of anything outside your field of expertise

>>1185180
At least they have a field of expertise.

>>1185158
Huh? I wasn't saying you should agree with them.

>>1185175
I didn't say that ethics classes were useful, only that it was a reflection that those people generally don't give a shit about ethics outside of a narrow context, like don't falsify lab data. Although even then they probably leave the class slightly more ethical than when they came in.

>not subjective
Of course it's subjective. It's something you should think about and not ignore

>useless
Lost cause.

>>1185180
>Most humanities majors are stupid leftists
Kek

Most scientists actually have decent political beliefs.

File: 1458096813763.png (765KB, 1001x1001px) Image search: [Google]

765KB, 1001x1001px

>>1185163
>>1185175
>>1185178
>All this damage control

>>1185197
>Damage control
Oh, you mean the philosophy fags trying to pretend their useless degree matters or that they aren't filled with liberal SJW faggots?

File: D73.png (208KB, 445x481px) Image search: [Google]

208KB, 445x481px

>>1185186
>>1185195
Are you seriously that dense?

>>1185212
Nice damage control.
Sorry other majors didn't take the feminist bullshit pill like humanities faggots did.

>This thread
It's basically just a few idiots flinging shit at each other for some fields they neither care nor know about.

>>1185205
repeating things ad nauseam is not an actual argument my famalam

>>1185212
>TFW science will always be too hard for most retards, women and SJWs to get in

>>1185223
>Denying the fact that Humanities is the SJW breading ground

>>1185212
>>1185197
Don't you people have a multiculturalism event to go to?

>>1185193
Ethics classes are useless. Ethics is a personal subjective thing that comes from how someone was raised.

File: 1463635190095.jpg (94KB, 750x849px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 750x849px

>>1185224
And when will you do when said rabble rousers drive the masses onto your smug cunts?
Or have you also deluded yourselves into believeing that stemfags are the actual elite?

On a fun note, there are far more maoists and the like than SJWs and mememists in the left side of the academia

>>1185242
>Smug cunts
That would be humanities majors since they are filled with idiots who have accomplished nothing yet believe they are morally superior to people and their cisgendered evil white mans world.

>>1185242
>Smug
It's clear you have no idea what you are talking about. You get smugness from politically biased history professors trying to paint the world in their own biased "I see the world how it really is" view. Generally they are hardcore liberal white guilt fucks.
Most science teachers on the other hand talk about science.