Does anyone else feel this sense of existential dread when discussing or reading about philosophy? Its the kind of existential dread I have not felt since I did psychedelics in high school, I didn't know the same feeling could be elicited sober. I feel so uncertain about everything, about science even. Growing up in the west as a millennial you are taught a very simplistic materialistic view of the world and everything seems simple and solid. Going into philosophy you have your entire world view shaken to it's core until its barley standing. I use to think it was obvious that this was all there was to the universe, now I see my ignorance.
Also, is there a word for someone who refrains from taking a philosophical view point? I feel like nothing can ultimately be proven or disproven and taking a stance (even a nihilistic one) is ignorant
Babump
Pyrrhonian skepticism, bro
>>7829179
>MFW felt that feel
>being scared of the inevitable
normalfag
>>7829179
>Being scared of ideas
Okay dude thanks for letting us know.
>>7829179
The dread that you experience is a productive one, but only if you allow it to have that effect on you. I understand an empathize with the feeling, a bare sense of being unaware and wrong about so much, maybe even everything...
But allowing yourself to sit in that uncomfortable place will be productive for you, and if you make the effort to work through enough philosophy then you may fall in love with that feeling and grow from it. Starting with something like Sophie's World may aid this process.
As to your question that nothing can ultimately be proven or disproven, you should look at the attached image.
It's your ego disintegrating. With some years of effort, the dread goes away.
this must be satire
>philosophy is so important
>its like doing mushrooms
>lol
>>7829549
>implying the nature of your existence and reality itself isn't important
And the mushrooms were just anothet example of a thing that causes existential dread, which they often do.
Whats your problem?
>>7829496
Lol I hate nihilists. Their worst fear is that life will have meant something (which it does) and they'll have to be accountable for their actions. And every nihilist I've known was much closer to the pic on the left, because they cant face the things they've done to themselves and others unless its all meaningless
>>7829426
>Being scared of ideas
Nice strawman. I clearly said I was afraid of the truth and its infinite possibilities, who the fuck is scared of ideas?
>>7829588
>implying you have a verifiable reference point from which to attribute 'importance'
>>7829179
What disturbs me the most is that I feel like I don't know how to think.
To me it makes sense to be "logical" about things and try to do them. I often try to discard my emotion and view things only from a logical perspective. After all, this is important for science and understanding reality, you need to push emotions to the side. And yet when I do this, it feels very unsatisfactory and lonely, like I'm denying some crucial part of myself, one that I can't really define.
The problem is, if I decide to embrace my emotional self, then I'm opening up the door to everything being subjective and the world really have no constant logic. At least, that's what it feels like to me. If I go upon my emotional desires it feels like I am taking the lesser, more illogical path and not being rational.
Yet, the highest moments of satisfaction seem to be when I just let everything go and don't care how to analyze or think, but just feel.
>>7829616
It doesn't matter if you consider it important, having your world view smashed and being put into perspective is scary. Your original post was fucking retarded and a gross misrepresentation of OP
>>7829624
Embrace The Dao anon. Align yourself with the natural way of things
>>7829625
>assuming that was the same poster
>assuming you can read
My fault, sorry.
>>7829588
>implying there arent far more interesting things than philosophy for the sake of philosophy
>>7829634
LOL EBIC COMEBACK XD
>>7829638
Embarrassing.
>>7829648
Im still waiting for an actual argument
>>7829651
>I use to think
>>7829660
Bad grammar? Thats the best you can do? I hardly see how that undermines my original point which you still haven't addressed
>>7829179
Let go of your sentimentality. It's making you retarded.
>Going into philosophy you have your entire world view shaken to it's core until its barley standing.
Lmao.
Cratylus was the first philosopher in the Western tradition to be driven to quietism as a result of his philosophy. Outdoing Heraclitus' dictum, he believed it not possible for a man to step in a river even one time. Aristotle records that Cratylus abandoned disputation and was reduced to silence.
In the Sutta Nipata, the Buddha remarks that the true sage holds no views; like the metaphor of the raft, philosophical positions are to be abandoned upon reaching gnosis, and serve only to lead the untaught to liberation. This is echoed by Wittgenstein's statement that the "real discovery is the one that lets me stop doing philosophy when I want to."
>>7829598
Details on that?
>>7829676
How so? Im not saying you're wrong, I'd just like some elaboration
>>7829598
nihilists simply state that there is no objective morality or meaning to life itself; and that meaning is socially constructed.
people make meaning. but that meaning, to a nihilist, is like religion or a fiction story: something completely made up and manufactured.
nihilists look and see the world for what it is, not how they wish it were.
>>7829688
Yah, but that's wrong
>>7829688
That's not nihilism, dumbass, that's existentialism. Nihilism can be epistemic (nothing can be known), ontological (there is nothing), or moral (there is no such thing as moral behavior).
>>7829704
i fail to see how my statement is different than the ones you mentioned. it's called existential nihilism, bro.
yes, there are different kinds of nihilism, but there was nothing in my post that didn't conform to the definition of the type of nihilism i was talking about.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Existential_nihilism
>>7829610
Not the anon you're talking to but you cannot deny that you're afraid of truth & its interpretations. Also,
>pic related
>>7829687
Emotions are an evolved form of instincts. While potentially helpful under specific circumstances, these things are antithetical to intellectual pursuits. If you let your inner life be ruled by your emotions and gut feelings, they'll make you rely on illogical, thoughtless, and downright maladaptive ideas rooted in the most primordial, underdeveloped parts of your brain.
>>7829598
No one's actually a "nihilist" and if they say they are, they're just a retarded kid. Nihilism is a step in the process of searching for meaning in life. If you can't find one no matter how hard you look, a possible answer to the question of "meaning" or "purpose" could be that there never was one to begin with and you need to create your own.
It's not an aversion to meaning, it's a reaction to not finding any.
>>7829179
Hegel already discovered all of the Truth retard. There's nothing left for philosophers to do at this point. It's over. mission accomplished.
>>7829775
>Nihilism is a step in the process of searching for meaning in life.
>you need to create your own [meaning].
I think these statements are marred by some bias. You feel that people must make meaning. But that's just your own personal preference. If there is no pre-set meaning, that does not mean people have to make meaning. That's an awfully big presumption to make.
i am screen capping this hilarious shit and sending it to all my phil student friends
>>7829794
I did call it a "possible answer" rather than the definitive conclusion. Even assuming one has no desire or need for a uniquely constructed meaning after seeing the "truth" as exposed through Nihilism, that still leaves them with the question of how they should proceed after ascertaining said "truth".
Nihilism is never a conclusion in and of itself because there's always a proceeding step of "ok, what's next?". Even if the answer is "nothing", there's still an extra step of determining why it's nothing under the assumption of nihilism.
>>7829702
You're lagging behind, read Brassier.
why the fuck am i occasionally alt tabbing to this thread while fapping to some trap on chaturbate?
>>7829598
people who identify as 'nihilists' are probably the left but most pure hedonists are the right side nihilists
>>7829598
>Their worst fear is that life will have meant something (which it does) and they'll have to be accountable for their actions.
[citation needed]
Entropy is the only "God". Childless hedonists don't spread their genes, that's the only punishment.
>>7829807
>"ok, what's next?"
Not wanting to suffer and die of starvation =/= meaning in life. I don't believe in there being any "meaning" of any sort, yet it doesn't stop me from eating and taking care of myself. I don't want to feel unpleasant stimuli and lose autonomy, but that's hardly a "meaning".
>https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Pragmatism:_A_New_Name_for_Some_Old_Ways_of_Thinking
>>7829912
You missed the point. I'm not saying the "next" thing is necessarily a meaning, it's a rationale of some sort -- like the one you've demonstrated in that post -- for why you should continue living at all and how you should live. Choosing to live in spite of a negation of meaning requires some sort of rationalization beyond the simple conclusion of "nothing means anything" because if nothing means anything is the conclusion itself, then your autonomy and conception of what an unpleasant stimuli is would themselves be meaningless and choosing to die would be just as valid as choosing to live.
what scares me is that the final conclusion of philosophy might be: chaos
>>7829179
You're experiencing what we call 'aporia', some kind of demolition of 'common sense' that is necessary before starting s serious study of philosophy. It means you on the good path OP. Read Plato.
>>7829859
You feel guilty you're acting on your primal, wasteful desires so you switch here to feel you are reading something worthwhile, intelligent, &c, which is precisely what allows you to indulge on masturbation to begin with.
>>7829959
its quite the waste of time. I couldve learned so much in the past few hours
>>7829984
Try to actually fuck a trap in real life, it will either turn you off from this fetish forever or, at least, you will have actual sex.
>>7829610
>Afraid of truth and it's infinite possibilities
Wow well learn how to fucking cognizize and think critically and you should be fine. By the way it's a blessing not a fucking curse. Read Spinoza a body isnt limited by an idea and vice versa.
>waifu Karen Gillan is OP pic
i will always be a nihilist because I will never fuck Karen Gillan
how has philosophy bettered anyone ever?
other than making them chat to themselves in their head through every single action to the point where they are barely human and merely walking and talking zombies.
i get it if emotionally you are fucked up and you want to apply intellect to every single aspect of life to block everything out but if you have some semblance of happiness it just seems absurdly stupid.
>>7830394
>apply intellect to every single aspect of life to block everything out
wut?
>>7830394
>bettered anyone ever
Nice spook my friend, though Philosophy is about the search for Truth, universal and unwavering, and which doesn't give us any guarantee of a better life. Socrates fucking died because of it.
>>7829953
this
>>7830429
in terms of our experience of life, meaning and existence, there is no universal "Truth". the only truth is your own, this is evident in the works of many philosophers.
>>7830831
>the only truth is your own
Yeaaah you're gonna need to support this premise if you expect anyone to accept it as self evident.
>>7829179
>I feel like nothing can ultimately be proven or disproven and taking a stance (even a nihilistic one) is ignorant
This is probably some form of radical skepticism
However the above is not the same as
>someone who refrains from taking a philosophical view point?
Since the former is a philosophical view point.
I don't know a name for what you are getting at, put look up the Socratic Method if you haven't already and read Plato.
>>7829624
I think you are confused because of this dichotomy between emotion and reason you have created. It is probably impossible to not embrace both always.
>>7830394
Yeah I owe everything to philosophy and I am a very happy person
>>7829764
How are desires like the one that drives intellectual pursuit not exist on the level of emotion?
>>7829179
Being able to step out of ones framework of understanding is -- as schopenhaur said -- to experience the sublime. And is, as he said, a characteristic of genius. I think Sartre referred to this same frame of mind as experiencing the absurd. But yeah, I have a few milestones in my short life where I've made realizations that have caused my prior belief systems to crumble -- that sudden loss of balance is startling, and for a little while the veil seems to be lifted from my vision, and every event in my day to day seems foreign and curious. And this has only been possible for me when another system is more powerful then the prior, and the loss of balance exists only until my mind once again straightens things out and I once again return to the normal, safe, comfortable, dreaming, zombie existence.
I've never taken hallucinogens but I imagine that they create a similar experience.
>>7830394
You just don't get it. I'm not talking to myself I'm talking to the ghosts of my dead ancestors. We have a loving relationship and nothing you say can snap me out of it.
>>7830844
your truth will never be evident to anybody but yourself. that you require empirical evidence to prove to others and seemingly yourself how your mind views the world is rather unfortunate.
>>7830893
>>7831056
the same thing could be said about anybody who pursues any passion at all. music, art, science, go-karting, dance. i'm glad that you are satisfied with your life, but it most probably has nothing to do with philosophy.
>>7829598
>they'll have to be accountable for their actions
I'm a determinist too
checkmate
>>7829682
So it seems like the overwhelming opinion of this board is that morality is relative? Seems a bit silly to me
>>7831143
>the same thing could be said about anybody who pursues any passion at all.
No.
By studying philosophy I am better able to not have ridiculous beliefs which would make life harder for me. Dance doesn't do that. Maybe mathematics or the sciences but it seems far less likely.
For example
>other than making them chat to themselves in their head through every single action to the point where they are barely human and merely walking and talking zombies.
I try very strongly to not make the things I am considering into caricatures. It is very easy to say that all of something is always like this but thinking like that often leads to problems.
I mean really. You haven't met everyone who has studied philosophy and that is what you are claiming essentially. There is no way you would know what these people think "through every single action" of their lives.
Unless this is just bait.
>>7831408
>By studying philosophy I am better able to not have ridiculous beliefs which would make life harder for me. Dance doesn't do that. Maybe mathematics or the sciences but it seems far less likely.
those "beliefs" you claim to have are really ideas that you use to quell your actual beliefs.
some things that work on the same principle - religion, self-help books.
also the reality of living in different contexts and environments shines the light on the impracticality of applying philosophical concepts to the real world.
and when i talk about satisfaction i mean that anyone who pursues a field they enjoy will generally be satisfied in life.
yes you can say i haven't met every single philosophy major so i don't know what they are like but really most of you are either detached and unpleasant or you go the self-help route like alain de botton.
>>7829688
It's painfully obvious you have no clue what you are talking about. Please stop.
>>7831445
>most of you are either detached and unpleasant or you go the self-help route like alain de botton.
You're just proving my point. You are unable to give up this point even when it is shown to be silly.
So what, now instead of knowing all people who study philosophy, you know most of them? How is that more believable?
>those "beliefs" you claim to have are really ideas that you use to quell your actual beliefs.
How convenient that you know what "real" beliefs are and that you somehow know (again, without meeting me) that the beliefs I have are in fact "ideas" and not "real beliefs"
So go ahead, why don't we see how well you know me without ever having met me. What are these beliefs I have that aren't actual beliefs.
Also, why don't you do me the favor of defining what belief, idea, and "real" belief mean.
>>7831459
you typed it yourself
>By studying philosophy I am better able to not have ridiculous beliefs which would make life harder for me
also the anime pics really aren't helping.
>>7831540
How is that related to my questions though (I know it is related I am asking specifically how is it related)?
Are you saying this is an example of X (one of the things I asked you to define)? I asked for a definition, not an example.
Are you saying that this is one of those beliefs that I have that aren't actual beliefs? I get that, I am asking you to explain what that means.
Again, you are just throwing out these terms as if I am supposed to know what they mean. You don't just change the definitions of idea and belief without letting everyone know what these new definitions are and why they are better than the older ones.
>>7829179
first of all you should know what philosophy is, and second of all most people who call themselves philosophers are actually left wing relativist nihilist loser cunts.
just be careful.
>>7829179
after i took lots of acid in my gap year i couldn't even read anything pertaining to metaphysics or philosophy - even the silmarillion was too much for me - i'd get hyper anxious and just look away from the page.
thankfully that's all passed now
fucking acid, honestly
I'am very sad because when I go to Youtube for finding a booktuber to watch...
I only find an enormous majority of little women that are 16-22 with plebs Lit.
>Harry potter
>Hunger games
>Divergente
And Of course >John Green
And most of Time, these girls are from a rich family.
>>7831364
metaethical nihilism for the win desss
>>7831445
>the reality of living in different contexts and environments shines the light on the impracticality of applying philosophical concepts to the real world.
lol wut
>>7831540
>>>/reddit/
>>7831575
Yeah its weird how pretty much all female vloggers seem rich as fuck. Their houses are always enourmous and beautifully furnished, and often they make the videos sitting on their nice patios or pooldeck
Its like...damn
>>7829434
Am I the only one to feel that this image is an odious oversimplification ?
>>7831591
Of course it is.
>>7831364
>seems a bit silly
Wew lad
Moral nihilism is where it's at
>>7831547
you asked how i knew your "real" beliefs. look at what you typed, it's pretty simple the fact that you have to complicate such a basic thing is pretty suspect.
>>7832750
What's suspect is how you keep focusing in on only one thing out of what I asked you.
We could debate about how I was actually asking how you how it is possible that I have beliefs that aren't actual beliefs when I asked
>What are these beliefs I have that aren't actual beliefs.
But sure, let's ignore that and say you gave me the answer I was looking for.
Now give me the definitions I asked for (the ones that conveniently make this problem of belief and "actual" belief come back)
>>7829179
>taking life seriously
>not finding job and humor in the absurdity and meaninglessness
>>7829179
I'd call your stance absolute epistemic scepticism.
>>7829853
>read Brassier.
Lmao
>>7832897
what people profess to believe and what they actually believe are usually different, in your case it is blatant.
you admitted yourself that you had "ridiculous beliefs" before you went into philosophy, which you apparently resolved with philosophy. what i'm telling you is that those are your beliefs, you haven't changed what you believe you have merely supplemented it with ideas.
in the same way many christians believing it is best to "love your enemy" and "forgive and forget" helps them to avoid dealing with resentment.
argument and debate with yourself is the method you are using to help you function in the world. in that sense, you are disconnected from your own truth and the world because you require a constant monologue to shield yourself from your own beliefs.
to simply just be isn't possible for you because you're not functioning like a biological being who thinks you're functioning as pure thought.
>>7833373
What do you have against Brassier?
>>7829179
This comes and goes. You integrate new ideas, new fears arise, old ones dies, etc. As you age hopefully you also practice what you preach and develop wisdom and insight which you can use to guide others.
>>7829179
Philosophy by frisson, the notion that the spookier a question is to contemplate, the less trivial it is, is something that has always been attractive to my instinct for seeking the stimulus of truth that adds luster to life's cozy occasions. Just the other day, I was reading a comment by someone, waxing metaphysical, who felt certain that substance and number were separable as Plato believed, and Aristotle did not. Modern theoretical physicists almost all side with Aristotle, but as with everything else as fundamental, their reasons for doing so are as much an affair of the imagination as of how the terms are defined. Personally, I find it far easier to imagine substance without number--a universe all of one substance undivided into particles--than number existing without substance to partition. From nothing comes nothing, not even the scaffolding of mathematics, if I may lean on a metaphor from Lear's fool.
Questions are ideas, and almost no matter how abstract they are, they have real consequences, even those which can't be tested in the laboratory or by rigorous inference from observation. Francis Bacon, who emphasized how much our opinions are biased by our natures, and greatly feared time's ravages, was curiously sanguine about philosophy's deeper questions, in part because he was able to defend himself against anxiety through some rather elaborate fantasies of literal immortality achieved through the foundation of a kind of technocratic state, dedicated to the purpose. Take that as an example of how personal philosophy is, as an activity conditioned by the imagination, and in which there can be mixed more or less of the ingredients of reflective poetry or sage aphorism.
It seems to me that almost everyone entertains a more or less vague "exit strategy" concerning what to do if the conditions of their own life become irremediably not worth enduring, but by comparison to brooding on those, the most dizzying rides of philosophical inquiry are a delicious luxury, and probably the more productive the more they're taken that way.
>>7829179
Some spooky fella, who it were I forget, summed it up for me; "Philosophy is the art of preparing oneself for death".
I took up the formal study of philosophy to try to cope with my fear and confusion at the way the world is, I wasn't the most naturally talented student, but persistence, I found, didn't grant me peace of mind in the conventional sense I thought it would.
Instead of improving my understanding of the world, I realised that many aspects of the world are forever beyond my understanding, and that if I couldn't make peace with that, I would never just be able to live.
>>7833473
Numbers are a mental abstraction rather than a fact of nature I think.
But they're a mental abstraction that human beings use as a tool for dealing with multitudes of objects or concepts, because it is one that is innately tied to our perceptions of the outside world.
Now we know the atom is not the smallest indivisible unit of matter, and that reality is essentially a particulate play against a seething back background of imperceptible cosmic foam.
Even a Planck unit is technically further divisible, it's just anything smaller is so astronomically small as to be, for our intents and purposes, meaningless and unobservable.
>>7833379
I asked for definitions, why are you incapable of doing that? This is the third time I have asked you to do that.
Define the word belief. Define the word idea.
Any here is a hint for where this argument is going: attaching the word "real" or "actual" does not change a definition, since I can always counter that I have the "more real" or "more actual" word than you do.
>you haven't changed what you believe you have merely supplemented it with ideas.
Do you not understand how no one can make any sense of this sentence until you tell people what you mean by the words belief and idea? You are not using those words the way they are usually used so you need to explain.
If we're talking about the pragmatics of philosophy, it's only true purpose is to deconstruct the ego and belief systems, but that's where it ends. Adopting a philosophical position to reconcile its necessary destruction is betraying its original purpose. Feeling horribly anxious and being consumed by existential dread is a part of the process. But instead of trying to patch up these feelings with philosophy, which will only leave you unsatisfied, you should come to appreciate and live in the destruction of your ego. The world is a beautiful place when you don't have to worry about searching for something you will never truly find.
>>7833717
why are you incapable of discussion without going into some semantics game? are you autistic by any chance?
>>7833738
well said. philosophy's pragmatic value comes from deconstructing insane ideologies that seek to keep people functioning in systems of control and power, enslaving them in the process.
>>7833664
Imho the majority of human undertakings are subconscious repressions of the inevitability of death.
>>7829624
Because you are a human being. All reason is merely justification for instinct.
>>7833857
The dominant cynical part of me agrees quite vehemently, but some small holdout portion of my super ego abhors it.
>>7833839
What about the ascetic attempt to accept it?
Is acceptance of death actually a desirable thing?
Why not fight it just for the fighting?
I think some people react in polar opposite ways to the same revelations because there really is no true path but that which you beat yourself.
>>7829785
>Truth
>>7833827
You are using vague words as the core point of your argument. So semantics is what helps make sense of what you are trying to say. If you were clear from the beginning we wouldn't need it, but you aren't, and you aren't fooling anyone by trying to dodge this.
We'll go with lexical definitions.
Belief:
1: a state or habit of mind in which trust or confidence is placed in some person or thing
2: something believed; especially : a tenet or body of tenets held by a group
3: conviction of the truth of some statement or the reality of some being or phenomenon especially when based on examination of evidence
Idea:
1: a thought, plan, or suggestion about what to do
2: an opinion or belief
3: something that you imagine or picture in your mind
4: a formulated thought or opinion
5: whatever is known or supposed about something <a child's idea of time>
6: the central meaning or chief end of a particular action or situation
It's pretty clear that the two words are very close to one another if not synonymous. Belief's 3 definitions are synonymous with Idea's 5th definition, and Idea's second definition states that an Idea is an opinion or belief.
So let's look at your argument after looking at these definitions and not the one's you refuse to give.
>those "beliefs" you claim to have are really ideas that you use to quell your actual beliefs.
Could be read as
>those "beliefs" you claim to have are really beliefs that you use to quell your actual beliefs.
Why? The definitions from above state that ideas are opinions or beliefs.
I literally cannot tell where you see the difference between beliefs and ideas because you wont say how you got there. For fucks sake, answer me this.
Why are these "ideas" from philosophy not beliefs?
>>7829295
underrated ideology
>>7834200
Pretty universally adaptable too, I feel many people are naïve Pyrrhonians without ever realising it.
>>7834193
here's your sentence:
>By studying philosophy I am better able to not have ridiculous beliefs which would make life harder for me
idk how many times i have to point out how you obscure your beliefs with philosophy, in the same way religious and self-help people do.
onto your largely redundant post, you realize that words are used in different ways in different contexts right?
you have said literally nothing about how philosophy has helped you in some tangible way. you getting into some semantic dictionary.com tirade resulting from an inability to argue your point is sad t bh.
My problem is that when I think about things too much, nothing seems to make sense. I know that sounds lame and edgy, but it's how I feel. When I read history I feel like I can never understand what really happened, because the writing of history is a bunch of accounts written by people for political/propaganda reasons and things have doubtlessly been mistold over time.
And I have a hard time understanding distinctions and classifications. It seems like everything we know has been constructed by a human out of convenience. Like animal taxonomy: SOMEONE or a group of people are decided what the "official" classifications are, but why do they get to decide? How can they know? Sometimes I find myself thinking "Everything is the same".
>>7831575
you discovered what women are about. free leisure, leisure paid by somebody else.
>>7834583
How do I become a lady of leisure?I am six one, male, unemployed and possessed of a rich carpet of luxuriant auburn bodyhair, will this help?
>>7834622
Just start identifying yourself as a woman and scream at people and claim injustice when they dont play along
>>7829179
For all you and I know the universe could be completely uniform and nothing could be said to have existed.
It's interesting to note that to exist is in some sense to be conditioned; what I said above is the natural view of a person who has characterized the universe by a state of uncondition, his rationale for doing so is that things external to him don't appear to contain the same eidetic qualities of his own consciousness, not even the brain-matter that makes up his own mind.
However, to exist is, after all, to be conditioned.
Things exist to us by participation in us, to know is in some sense to become; to be subjugated and conquered by the thing known and at the same time to overcome it or more precisely to receive it, to have it placed at your feet for you, to share with it a localized space in the mind of God and thereby exist together absolutely.
>>7831590
How is it weird? It makes perfect sense that entitled cunts like that would have the right balance of spare time, disposable income, and self-absorption to think others should watch nobodies like them talking about books.
If you want the truth, don't be affraid to go beyond the edge of your known world, OP. And then some.
Science assumes the real world in the same sense we assume that the Sun goes around the Earth in our everyday lives, or mathematics assumes an ideal realm populated with numbers and structures. It is a practical attitude of a working scientist (farmer, mathematician,...) that saves time and effort on complications irrelevant to the task at hand. Upon reflection one could conjecture that this attitude does reflect operation in a mind independent world inhabited by real things. A realist might even argue that doing otherwise undermines our usual activities, scientific activities in particular, and leaves them hanging. But this reasoning is moralizing and emotional, not rational. Which bring us directly to what it means to have "faith in science": what is the goal of science?
Plato once taught that the goal of geometry is to lift the soul from the bonds of the sensible to higher pastures of philosophy. In a similar vein a realist might say that it is uncovering the hidden reality of nature that animates science. But this stance naturally undermines itself, once science replaces the apparent reality of everyday life (or older theory) with deeper scientific reality, and transfers its realist commitments to the latter, the same doubt arises about the latter as it raises about the former. Indeed, scientists are trained not to take appearances at face value and seek ever deeper explanations. Cao and Schweber give an interesting account of how this dynamic plays out in modern physics in Conceptual Foundations and the Philosophical Aspects of Renormalization Theory:"the recent developments support a pluralism in theoretical ontology, an antifoundationalism in epistemology and an antireductionism in methodology. These implications are in sharp contrast with the neo-Platonism implicit in the traditional pursuit of quantum field theorists... which assumed that, through rational (mainly mathematical) human activities, one could arrive at an ultimate stable theory of everything." (see especially pp.73-77).
The scientific method itself is not a natural extension of realism, but something in tension with it. The hypothetico-deductive origin of mature scientific ontologies plainly means that they took shape in speculation, only empirical consequences of which were confirmed afterwards. This gives rise to the famous problem of underdetermination of scientific theories associated with Duhem and Quine. And the "no miracles" argument from empirical success to realism is acknowledged to be logically uncompelling even by realists. Looking at history it is hard to expect that fundamental theories of today can not share the fate of geocentrism and ether, whose empirical consequences are nonetheless fully integrated into the modern theories, affirming the empirical continuity of science.
>>7834991
Anti-realism in ontology goes hand in hand with instrumentalism in epistemology, and a different understanding of the goals of science. They are empirical adequacy, and more remotely practical success of applications, rather than a search for hidden reality. This may strike a realist as lowly and demeaning of science, but that again is appeal to emotions, and mechanics too once "corrupted the good of geometry", according to Plato, for it "uses bodies needing much vulgar manual labor". There is no being right or wrong about goals, they are not matters of fact. This is one reason why the dispute is perennial. Anti-realism and instrumentalism take the scientific method itself at face value, and view the ontologies it produces only as tools. Anti-realism takes an agnostic position on reality of theoretical entities, and the idealism/materialism dispute in particular, and questions if one can even make sense of "mind-independent" (as opposed to just not mind-determined) reality. Unlike realism it is a stable position, starting at anti-realism one is anchored there, whereas starting at realism one has to resist being led away from it. And it has as much faith in science as does realism, but on its own terms.
Here is Quine's description of his faith in science in On What There Is, that an anti-realist can sign under:"The physical conceptual scheme simplifies our account of experience because of the way myriad scattered sense events come to be associated with single so-called objects; still there is no likelihood that each sentence about physical objects can actually be translated, however deviously and complexly, into the phenomenalistic language... Viewed from within the phenomenalistic conceptual scheme, the ontologies of physical objects and mathematical objects are myths. The quality of myth, however, is relative; relative, in this case, to the epistemological point of view. This point of view is one among various, corresponding to one among our various interests and purposes". Technically, Quine self-identifies as a realist, see however How does Quine answer the metaphysician's claim that scientism is self-refuting? for the nature of his "realism".
>>7829598
>>7834506
>idk how many times i have to point out how you obscure your beliefs with philosophy
You keep claiming you have made that argument but that is the only thing you do, claim. You have not given an explanation or reason for your claim, which is what I keep asking you to do.
I obscure my beliefs with philosophy apparently, right?
Which means the next question should be, how do you know that? How are the ideas of philosophy when believed different than beliefs? You keep bringing up religion and self-help as if this is an explanation but it isn't, I don't know why you would think this is somehow an explanation. Maybe you're just afraid to actually make your argument.
Again, why are these "ideas" from philosophy not beliefs? I mean is this magic? Do ideas of philosophy magically become not beliefs once I start believing them? Quit running away from this and answer me this straight forward question.
>you realize that words are used in different ways in different contexts right?
Yes. That is why I have asked you, four times, for your context, to define your words, since you are clearly using these words in a different way than they are normally used.
>you have said literally nothing about how philosophy has helped you in some tangible way.
Nice distraction. You never asked me for examples, this whole conversation has been you dodging trying to clarify your claim.
tldr; Why are these "ideas" from philosophy not beliefs when believed? How do you define belief and idea? You could blow me out of the water if you could just answer these questions, anyone reading this can see all of my weight in this debate is that you can't answer these questions or your answers will be weak.
>>7835234
>why are these "ideas" from philosophy not beliefs?
basically you are stuck in your head and you don't try to get out of your head you find a way to make yourself comfortable within it.
you are not your conscious beliefs alone and if you choose to replace feeling entirely with thought you are a zombie.
there exists information in feeling that cannot be articulated in words and what i'm saying is that there was information in the way those "ridiculous beliefs" made you feel and instead of choosing to understand it you chose to reason your way out of it. you are still stuck in it you just don't really realize it.
if it helps you get about your day then go ahead, all i'm saying is that you have domesticated yourself for society in the worst possible way.
>you never asked for examples
give me some examples then.
>>7834293
The ataraxia thing needs more cultivation in most though.
