Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,819 Year: 3,076/9,624 Month: 921/1,588 Week: 104/223 Day: 2/13 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Philosophy 101
Straggler
Member
Posts: 10333
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 1 of 190 (606126)
02-18-2011 2:27 PM


Is philosophy a load of navel gazing pompous pointless nonsense? or does philosophy provide us with the foundations on which science and society are formed?
I would say a bit of both. I think real philosophy is absolutely vital to the sort of questions EvC is designed to contend with. BUT there is undoubtably a contingent of philosophers who need their superior post-modern bubble to be burst. As per Alan Sokal and the Fashionable Nonsense
But this post-modern drivel doesn’t make all philosophy pointless. The need for philosophy remains with regard to how and why we should choose to live (i.e moral/political philosophy) and how/what we can know and to what extent we can distinguish things like belief from knowledge (i.e epistemology).
What do others (Hello Mod and Crashfrog) think?

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by AdminSlev, posted 02-18-2011 5:23 PM Straggler has replied
 Message 6 by Coyote, posted 02-23-2011 9:13 PM Straggler has replied
 Message 7 by Taz, posted 02-23-2011 10:06 PM Straggler has replied
 Message 8 by nwr, posted 02-23-2011 11:25 PM Straggler has replied
 Message 9 by Jon, posted 02-24-2011 12:08 AM Straggler has replied
 Message 11 by xongsmith, posted 02-24-2011 2:25 AM Straggler has not replied

  
AdminSlev
Member (Idle past 4641 days)
Posts: 113
Joined: 03-28-2010


Message 2 of 190 (606127)
02-18-2011 5:23 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Straggler
02-18-2011 2:27 PM


I don't seem to know where to put this. Will the coffee house do ?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Straggler, posted 02-18-2011 2:27 PM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by Straggler, posted 02-18-2011 8:29 PM AdminSlev has not replied

  
Straggler
Member
Posts: 10333
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 3 of 190 (606128)
02-18-2011 8:29 PM
Reply to: Message 2 by AdminSlev
02-18-2011 5:23 PM


Philosophy 101 (Pointless or Pertinent)
Wherever you think best.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by AdminSlev, posted 02-18-2011 5:23 PM AdminSlev has not replied

  
Straggler
Member
Posts: 10333
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 4 of 190 (606129)
02-23-2011 4:49 PM


**Bump For Admins**
To promote or not to promote......

  
AdminPD
Inactive Administrator


Message 5 of 190 (606131)
02-23-2011 9:03 PM


Thread Copied from Proposed New Topics Forum
Thread copied here from the Philosophy 101 thread in the Proposed New Topics forum.

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2106 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 6 of 190 (606135)
02-23-2011 9:13 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Straggler
02-18-2011 2:27 PM


2,500 years and counting
Is philosophy a load of navel gazing pompous pointless nonsense?
For the most part, yes.
The few contributions we have from philosophy (logic, etc.) could just as easily have come from other fields as needed.
To scientists, the majority of philosophy now seems to be, "But you have to pay attention to us! We were here first! (Whimper. Snivel.)"
Just look at post-modernism and related nonsense for examples of modern philosophy.
No wonder most scientists couldn't care less.
(Flame suit on, but only set to moderate.)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Straggler, posted 02-18-2011 2:27 PM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 12 by Dr Adequate, posted 02-24-2011 2:43 AM Coyote has not replied
 Message 15 by Straggler, posted 02-24-2011 3:30 AM Coyote has not replied

  
Taz
Member (Idle past 3292 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 7 of 190 (606141)
02-23-2011 10:06 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Straggler
02-18-2011 2:27 PM


I quite agree with the wolf on this one.
My own problem with philosophy is it tends to get too nonsensical without much base on reality. Nothing demonstrates this better than modernism and post-modernism. What a load of crap.
We have learned from the past that if you base your frame of thought not on physical evidence than you are most likely to be wrong. Look at how Aristotle described the motion of projectile. According to him, if you throw an object it will go in a straight line parallel to the ground until it loses it's libido or whatever and then fall straight down to the ground towards its natural state. A simple experiment of throwing something would have proven this wrong, but no since philosophers are all knowing and don't need no confirmation with reality.
I'm constantly amazed at how people continue to put any weight on philosophy at all. It has little to do with reality.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Straggler, posted 02-18-2011 2:27 PM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 14 by Straggler, posted 02-24-2011 3:25 AM Taz has replied
 Message 19 by 1.61803, posted 02-24-2011 10:07 AM Taz has not replied
 Message 20 by slevesque, posted 02-24-2011 10:36 AM Taz has not replied

  
nwr
Member
Posts: 6408
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 5.1


Message 8 of 190 (606149)
02-23-2011 11:25 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Straggler
02-18-2011 2:27 PM


Every body does philosophy. It human to do so. And there's a philosophical component to scientific theorizing.
Just to be clear, I will assume that you were not talking about that kind of philosophy, but were concerned with professional philosophy, typically done in academia.
Straggler writes:
Is philosophy a load of navel gazing pompous pointless nonsense? or does philosophy provide us with the foundations on which science and society are formed?
Yes, and no (in that order). Well, okay, it isn't quite that bad. But there is a lot of nonsense.
Straggler writes:
But this post-modern drivel doesn’t make all philosophy pointless.
I wouldn't worry too much about that. It is mostly temporary fads that will die out.
The bigger concern should be the emphasis on tradition, and the lack of any empirical testing. The traditions mostly come from an earlier era when creationist thinking was rather common.

Jesus was a liberal hippie

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Straggler, posted 02-18-2011 2:27 PM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by Taz, posted 02-24-2011 1:27 AM nwr has replied
 Message 18 by Straggler, posted 02-24-2011 8:48 AM nwr has replied

  
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 9 of 190 (606153)
02-24-2011 12:08 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Straggler
02-18-2011 2:27 PM


Watchmaker in the Dungeon
Is philosophy a load of navel gazing pompous pointless nonsense? or does philosophy provide us with the foundations on which science and society are formed?
I would say a bit of both.
And how did you come to this conclusion?
Edited by Jon, : No reason given.

Check out No webpage found at provided URL: Apollo's Temple!
Ignorance is temporary; you should be able to overcome it. - nwr

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Straggler, posted 02-18-2011 2:27 PM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 13 by Straggler, posted 02-24-2011 3:22 AM Jon has replied

  
Taz
Member (Idle past 3292 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 10 of 190 (606166)
02-24-2011 1:27 AM
Reply to: Message 8 by nwr
02-23-2011 11:25 PM


nwr writes:
It is mostly temporary fads that will die out.
You kidding? This post-modernism drivel has been around for almost a century now and it's still going strong among academic philosophy. Given that there are now a growing number of academics who openly voice their opinion that philosophy is useless today.
Added by edit.
Here is a blog explaining quite clearly why post-modernism is equivalent to nonsense.
Rationally Speaking: Provably Nonsense: Part I
I particularly like the reference to the Alan Sokal Hoax, an example I've been using for years to demonstrate my point that post-modernist philosophy is indistinquishable from complete nonsense.
Here is another good read. This is by Richard Dawkins, one of the most articulate person alive, me thinks.
Page not found | Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science
Edited by Taz, : No reason given.
Edited by Taz, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by nwr, posted 02-23-2011 11:25 PM nwr has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 25 by nwr, posted 02-24-2011 12:20 PM Taz has not replied
 Message 108 by Omnivorous, posted 02-26-2011 9:47 AM Taz has not replied

  
xongsmith
Member
Posts: 2578
From: massachusetts US
Joined: 01-01-2009
Member Rating: 6.8


Message 11 of 190 (606173)
02-24-2011 2:25 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Straggler
02-18-2011 2:27 PM


Straggler writes:
Is philosophy a load of navel gazing pompous pointless nonsense? or does philosophy provide us with the foundations on which science and society are formed?
Paul Simon's ex-wife once told me it was just a smile on a dog.
???

- xongsmith, 5.7d

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Straggler, posted 02-18-2011 2:27 PM Straggler has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 285 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 12 of 190 (606177)
02-24-2011 2:43 AM
Reply to: Message 6 by Coyote
02-23-2011 9:13 PM


Re: 2,500 years and counting
The few contributions we have from philosophy (logic, etc.) could just as easily have come from other fields as needed.
Alternatively, it could be argued that these would constitute contributions to philosophy no matter what the job title of the person who came up with them.
It depends, of course, on how you define philosophy, and I should like to see someone have a go at that.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by Coyote, posted 02-23-2011 9:13 PM Coyote has not replied

  
Straggler
Member
Posts: 10333
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 13 of 190 (606181)
02-24-2011 3:22 AM
Reply to: Message 9 by Jon
02-24-2011 12:08 AM


Re: Watchmaker in the Dungeon
Jon writes:
And how did you come to this conclusion?
Philosophically?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by Jon, posted 02-24-2011 12:08 AM Jon has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 48 by Jon, posted 02-24-2011 7:48 PM Straggler has replied

  
Straggler
Member
Posts: 10333
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 14 of 190 (606183)
02-24-2011 3:25 AM
Reply to: Message 7 by Taz
02-23-2011 10:06 PM


Empiricism.....?
Taz writes:
We have learned from the past that if you base your frame of thought not on physical evidence than you are most likely to be wrong.
Isn't this a philosophical conclusion? How have you decided which methods of investigation are superior in terms of being "correct". And what do you mean by "wrong"?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by Taz, posted 02-23-2011 10:06 PM Taz has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 22 by Taz, posted 02-24-2011 11:41 AM Straggler has replied

  
Straggler
Member
Posts: 10333
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 15 of 190 (606185)
02-24-2011 3:30 AM
Reply to: Message 6 by Coyote
02-23-2011 9:13 PM


Re: 2,500 years and counting
Coyote writes:
Just look at post-modernism and related nonsense for examples of modern philosophy.
Sure. But is that the be-all-and-end-all of philosophy? Or just a fashionable blind alley?
Coyote writes:
No wonder most scientists couldn't care less.
On what basis do scientists derive their methods? Why do they think these methods are superior to other methods? What is tentativity and why is it necessary in science? How do we judge what is science and what is not?
And then there is political and moral philosophy. How do we decide what sort of society we want to live in? And how do we best achieve that?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by Coyote, posted 02-23-2011 9:13 PM Coyote has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 16 by xongsmith, posted 02-24-2011 4:16 AM Straggler has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024