Do you think a scientific basis for philosophy is possible?

Yes.

Doesn't philosophy deal with shit like free will, afterlife, spiritualism and pretty much every unfalsifiable bullshit that even a 40 IQ braintard can have an opinion on with zero necessity to provide evidence ?

Then no.

>>8266375
>afterlife
>spiritualism
>evidence
>falsifiability
>fuck philisophy(?)
kek

>>8266364
Yes, but it would be retarded

>>8266375
a literal meme polyp in the fedora hive mind, look at him go

>>8267124
>>8267385
Science boards are not for bullshitting and memery ; Philosophy doesn't belong here.
>>>/x/
>>>/his/
>>>/lit/

>>8266364
philosophy is the basis for science

>>8266364
No, philosophy is not necessarily following the scientific method (as shown by many philosophers before). Philosophy is a crude tool for finding truth, it's been outclassed by science and will eventually die. Nowadays it's a meme at best.

>>8266364
No.

Although others have tried a more rigorous and formal approach to philosophical problems, people like Descartes and Russel. They did this inspired by mathematics and it's demonstrability power. It failed tho.

If that failed imagine what would happen if philosophers go full empirical monkeys...

It's retarded

>>8266364
It is called conceptual physics for the very reason that the only solutions that are produced are purely philosophical.

>>8267472
What other means were successful?

>>8266364
...science has philosophical basis. do you want circular reasoning?

>>8267437
Philosophy occupies the space between science and theology. They are not mutually exclusive in any way.

Philosophy majors have 2nd highest average IQ, only beaten by Physics

File: 1471063693485.png (93KB, 681x1716px) Image search: [Google]

93KB, 681x1716px

>>8267530
>based on Verbal SAT
kek

Philosophy isn't about solving real problems and finding grand truths. It's about how we articulate questions.

event scientific basis for science isn't possible
there's no real dudction, everything requires some amount of induction
take your head out of your ass

of course. anything is possible. but this IS an iffy one to THINK about, i give you that. kinda strenuous on the brain that's all. keep going!! you'll find it soon enough.

>>8267392
None of the shit you mentioned is especially or seriously philosophical.

>>8266375
>concurrent invocation of concepts of falsifiability AND of the adducing of evidence as the first conditions of science
kek nigga you need some philosophy of science you tard

>philosophy deals with the afterlife and spiritualism
please commit sudoku

>>8266364
This is a very poorly formed question.
Can science affect philosophy? Yes, and it has been doing so for ages now. So?
>>8266375
You have the slightest shred of an idea of why philosophy isn't science and then fail miserably to understand anything beyond that.
>>8267437
The scientific method is a philosophical framework.

Philosophy is bad when it tries to solve testable empirical stuff, yes. That's why it hasn't tried for ages now.

Philosophy won't die.

>>8266364
Nigga you dumb. It's the other way around, science originated from philosophy.

>>8269208
Kiiiind of, but that's not what he's asking.
What he's asking is retarded and already happens, though.

>>8266364
there's always a trivial, mathematical basis for the trivial vector space of objects, including philosophy.
Mathematics is scientific (p<0.05). so yeah. A scientific basis exists.

>>8267401
this this this

>>8266364
Yes National Socialism and Cosmotheism. See Dr. William Luther Pierce for more info:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4e4v4W_1CG8

>>8266364
No.
Philosophy is just science without the rigour.

http://bigthink.com/errors-we-live-by/why-are-scientists-philosophers-fighting-again?
You idiots need to read this

Philosophy isn't a science, but science is in essence a philosophy. One that adheres to empiricism, which is a philosophical ideal. Do you idiots not understand this?

>>8270598
HURR DURRRRR BUT PHILOSOPHY IS LE STUPID!!!!!! SCIENCE IS THE ONLY DRUE KNOW LEJDE XDDDDDDDDDDD

>>8270604
fuck off back to >>>/lit/

>>8270575
Kek

>>8270598
>*Science* *is* *empiricist philosophy*. You all are idiots for no lt getting this.
Wew lad

Trolly problem variation: All philosophers on one track, all scientists on the other.

WHAT DO?

>>8270594
Physicists don't explicitly dismiss philosophy, they just don't think about them and continue with their work.

>>8270730
Philosophy arises naturally when working in any academic field and many scientists are well versed in philosophy. On the other hand, philosophers kow jack shit about science.

>>8270742
If Dawkins, NDT, Harris (he's got a damn BA in phil), Krauss, etc. are representative of academia, no, scientists don't know shit about philosophy.

But yes, most action consequentialists will choose to let scientists live.

>>8270751
>>>8270742 (You)
>If Dawkins, NDT, Harris (he's got a damn BA in phil), Krauss, etc. are representative of academia, no, scientists don't know shit about philosophy.
Why would you think those faggots are representative of academia? Do your scientific knowledge comes solely from YouTube?

>>8270765
Because they are well known and they were rather influential in their fields. I don't know about Krauss, though.

>>8270773
Only Dawkins has been influential but he abandoned academia a long time ago. Have you been to a university before?

>>8270773
>Harris
philosopher
>Dawkins
biologist
>NDT
politician
>Krauss
first legit scientist you name

>>8266364
Yes, and the resulting philosophy would be called science.

Everything is philosophy, you fuckwits.

>>8270996
Your mom's philosophy.

Read POPPER ;) Then talk about your bulshitizm empirical based thing you call philozophy again.,...

And its really old author...

Most of old phylozophical thinking made it to todays physics....

If something on the picture is dead, than Howking... How do you want to kill religion without midsteppin for some kind of phylosophy that leads to empirical knowledge? Religion is not dead, obviously, so even if we believe man in white clothes as religion, how does it tuched the empirical knowledge its phylozophy that has still something to say? Like ¨ Why the fuck we still have this pharmanazi and religionist ? " Its question from pure philozophy and I think the question is right...

Philosophy as Wissenschaft provides the basis for science (Naturwissenschaft).

Philosophy is just critical thought seeking firm principles. Practicing modern science is founded in principles established by philosophy.

It has been known for at least 2.5 centuries that "pure" empiricism is nonsensical. We conceptualise. Philosophy is the manipulation of those concepts.

The modern usage of the word "science" is really bizarre. It used to mean any critical or rigorously knowledge-seeking approach to any subject. Now it's supposed to only refer to some nonexistent schoolboy version of "the scientific method" of hypothesis and experiment, or it's supposed to refer to some implicitly materialist, naturalist worldview that isn't at all necessary for practicing science and that many great scientists never had.

>>8271173
Wat

>>8266364
it would stop being philosophy?