How crucial are philosophers for scientific advancement?

>>8762856
I dunno maybe like 5 crucial.

>>8762856

Theres literally no fucking point to science at all without sound philosophical foundations.

Redundant

Not useful at all. Philosopher Aristotle was a do-nothing blow-hard. Mathematician Euclid and engineer Archimedes created far more than he did.

They used to be one and the same.

Now they're redundant. Just watch philosophers try and talk about quantum mechanics, it's hilarious.

If you wanna be a philosopher you should study science.

>>8762856
Totally irrelevant for 329 years and counting.

>>8762856
telling emperors to stand out of my fucking sunlight does sound pretty good...

>>8762864
Nope. Philosophy is useless to the sciences since science is a method, not a belief.

>>8763587
Philosophy is literally the development of methods. I think you have philosophy confused with religion.

>>8763247
"But truly, if I were not Alexander, I would be Diogenes."

a top lad, diogenes

>>8762856
Things like profit and intellectual/private property are currently putting scientific advancement in a crisis. People are distrusting of fields like psychology, medicine, and environmental sciences because this concept of money exists. Philosophers like Marx could help science tremendously by getting rid of this irrational archaic invention.

>>8762856
Philosophy is what gave the foundations and reminds us of what the scientific method is.
It is pretty useful, but in a indirect manner. If all mathematicians, physicists, engineers and doctors suddenly disappeared, we'd experience and immediate crysis. If all philosophers suddenly disappeared, we'd not feel anything at first, but as time goes by, society would eventually collapse due to lack of proper organization and simultaneously stop trusting and using science.