is philosophy a science?

>>8897283
ok thanks

>>8897279
Science owes its roots to philosophy. Without philosophy, we wouldn't have the axioms that make up the foundations of the science you know and love today.

>>8897279

Philosophy is not a science, but science is a philosophy, specially an applied subset of logic.

>>8897279
I implore everyone to read wilfrid sellars essay "philosophy and the scientific image of man" there's a free pdf online.

>>8897590
Everything is a subset of logic

>>8897279
Above it.

>>8897636

!Logic

>>8897582
Wrong.

Almost all of the "discoveries of philosophy" are immediately obvious to any normal human. Philosophers be like "by my profound intellectual introspection I have come to an conclusion that if an object A is same with object B, and object B is same with object C, then object A must be same with object C" and a 5 year old nigger kid will be like "wtf u talking about pedophile, I knew that from Sesame street I watched when I was 3 years old"

>>8897672
you clearly don't know what you are talking about

File: m'redditor.jpg (20KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 480x360px

>>8898866
He's probably just another one of those autistic college freshmen stemfags that give /sci/ a bad name.

>>8897672
Go back to >>>/reddit/. Your fedora tipping is not welcome here. I'm sure there are plenty of stemlords you can jerk off.

The best philosophy is basically mathematical.

File: 31886.jpg (26KB, 308x475px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 308x475px

>>8897279
I like philosophy books a lot before bed.
I don't see it as contributing to science/maths that much though

>>8897279
Philosophy is part of the science of politics.

There's a missuse of the word philosophy from both sides of the debate. STEM folk, think that philosophy is just riddles that are inherently flawed because there are no "definitions" and rigorous thought and it's based on pure feeling. This obviously comes from ignorance and depth in the subject. However, the retaliation of the "philosophers" of, everything is a subset of philosophy is also pure garbage. Philosophy has changed dramatically from what it was considered 100 years ago and it's in no way a name for the study of everything. Saying x is applied y just because x is more general is a completely naive view of academic subjects. Yes this also means engineering isn't just applied physics, biology isn't just applied chemistry, physics isn't just applied math and math isn't just applied logic. At the end, we are very specialized because each subject has tremendous amount of information, techniques and even philosophies, that is virtually impossible for one to achieve what was historicaly considered a philosopher. For them you cannot become a philosopher without math, logic, ethics rhetoric and the like, and there was no such thing as something was a trivial following of x or y. It's difficult not to achieve a superiority sense in academia considering how difficult can be to get even just your PhD, but the humility of our lack of knowledge should always be a value that everyone holds dear. Not only to maintain an authentic intelectual character, but also because in these years of specialized academics, we need open minds so we can work efficiently in interdisciplinary problems. Don't try to hide on "muh purity" curtain.