Why is philosophy often scoffed at by those who don't study it?
>>7948571
because they don't study it. Your question is loaded.
Sleep tight Plato
sleep tight Plato
>>7948571
They don't study it because it's ridiculous. Would you study alchemy?
>>7948571
Ignorance breeds fear of the unknown: in this case, philosophy is scoffed or demonized.
>>7948591
>not being an alchemy major
Enjoy your McJob faggot, I'll be off making gold at the king's court, 300 florins starting.
>>7948591
Sleep tight plato
As an atheist and an admirer of science I like for my beliefs to be based off of FACT.
>>7948603
Nice.
>>7948591
Yes. Alchemy is an art unparalleled by modern esotericism. I doubt you even understand what it really is.
>>7948583
People don't scoff at a field like computer science even though most don't study it
Sleep tight plato
>>7948612
>reading comprehension
>>7948605
Philosophers can't into science so they bullshit themselves with Philosophy. It's sad really.
>>7948618
That's just not true. Many prominent philosophers have also been scientists and mathematicians
sleep tight Plato
>>7948571
Philosophy is circular reasoning with very little real world applications. It is asking why mankind does something, not what can I do. This results in miltitudes of wwork being presented on topics that are indeed very intellectually stimulating but yet hold very real world application. Obviously political philosophy and logic are exempt from this but even political philosophy can become ridiculous because who in their right minds follows a single philosophy? Most people don't, they pick and choose through life experience. Philosophy, though mentally engaging, in essence is meaningless.
>>7948644
Multitudes* work*
I'm on a cell phone so apologies on the typos.
science and phil are complementary imo.
science: how to do things
philosophy: why to do things.
>>7948644
You are assuming some sort of theoretical/practical dualism that does not exist. It's like you're stuck at Platonism.
Because it's a endless war of words.
>>7948612
you haven't been to /sci/ then
Because many Philosophy students are pretentious as fuck, and they pretend to be experts in other people's fields. They feel entitled to criticize science, without comprehending the science they talk about.
sleep tight Plato
>>7948766
If a Philosophy student endlessly criticizes what they don't understand or know they are not students of Philosophy but students of foolishness.
>>7948612
>Physicist: Mathematics majors are virgin neckbeards!
>Mathematicians: Computer Science majors are virgin neckbeards!
>Computer Scientists: Physicists are virgin neckbeards!
/sci/
>>7948612
Exactly. people dont scoff at computer science because its currently a field that is perceived to be making money. I mean, money sure is nice, but plebs especially go fucking crazy over money. People scoff at philosophy because it doesn't make money and people dont give a rats arse about truth. If it did then you'd be seeing migrant parents pressuring their second generation kids to do philosophy. It's a reflection on how material society is. We are technologically advanced but philosophically and morally jaded.
Because philosophy students are often insufferable people and they bias regular folks against the study of philosophy
Same with poetry. It might have been fine if it weren't for poets
sleep tight Plato
Habermas argues that the sciences depend on ideological assumptions, and that enlightenment reason has become an instrument of domination.[2] Influenced by both Kantianism and Marxism, Habermas gives an account of the development of the modern natural and human sciences, concluding, on the basis of his inquiry into the social, historical, and epistemological conditions that made them possible, that the natural sciences depend upon the interest in technical control inherent in manual labor. The interaction and communication between human beings makes possible the historical and hermeneutic disciplines.[3][4]
>>7948618
Reals not feels. Am I right guys?
>>7948644
Everything we do is in essence meaningless.
Science is philosophy.
>>7948571
sleep tight Plato
>>7948605
A little too spicy
6/10
>>7948618
It's sad how STEMfags can't get a gf
>>7948612
There are tons of people who don't study CS, and just think it churns out code monkeys.
>>7948571
sleep tight Plato
>>7948571
sleep tight Plato
>>7948583
what makes his question loaded?
>>7949506
>Implying you don't get a complimentary assign gf when you get you engineering degree as a white dude
Enjoy your degenerate, leftist, barista gf humanitard
sleep tight Plato
>>7948571
Most of Philosophy's sense is lost in its intraslatable therminology for the non interest of the matter. This results in people regarding philosophy as a bunch of "blabber", besides that we also live in a World with a deep and heavy technical Racionality that values any form of knowledge with no productive or consumable concrete products as useless.
>>7948591
Best example of what I just posted is this anon´s response.
>>7949506
The problem with you people is that you think that intelligence is all about the appearance instead of knowing the truth. to a person who likes science all that matters is the truth. Philosophers like you only care about looking like you know the truth, that's why you fucks obscure your writings. I only wonder why you guys accept this thing, why are you not honest with yourself?
Are you learning something about this world? Why do you get satisfied with superficial masturbations and posturing? I know maybe you have to do it to get famous, but on a personal level, Why do you get satisfied with that? Why won't you look for the truth? the objective truth.
>>7948571
Unlike science, philosophy doesn't have any predictive power. It's largely coloured by old white-male voices of an age long past.
Why should it remain?
>>7948618
Have you ever read Schrödinger's philosophical works? Or did you know that Einstein studied profusely Kant's work with meticulous care?
>>7948804
philosophy is a subject that one can't be taught, one has to learn it. Wittgenstein spent large portions of his life fucking around doing menial jobs and probably learned more about philosophy doing that than he did in university. University should provide every student some basic history and fundamental ideas of philosophy but it has no business creating 'professional' philosophers.
I respect Greeks philosophers, Russell, Wittgenstein. Now guys like Derrida, Hegel are professional bullshitters.
>>7949660
i bet you wear fedoras you analytic neckbeard virgin
>>7948603
>300 florins
Top kek m8, that's like half a days worth of tilling for me
>>7949660
You shouldn't 'respect' any philosopher though, you're supposed to disagree, argue and struggle, with all of them. Socrates was killed because he was annoying and everyone hated him, it's part of the job, most people in this thread don't realize this.
>>7949639
Bait.
>>7949732
We are talking about knowledge and you can only think about sex. How can anyone take you seriously? Leave this conversation to grown ups
>>7949749
Prove it.
>>7949772
Prove what you little shit? There is nothing to prove, you just have to take a minimum of responsibility for your own thoughts sooner or later.
>>7949759
>>7949660
Hegel also has a very powerful emphasis on dialectics and professional command of language to get your point across. You can't call him a professional bullshitter. You have to take everything he says about the metaphysical with a grain of salt or perhaps if the mode of thought improves the way you think and live then maybe the metaphysics can be applied to your perception of things.
>>7949779
Prove it.
>>7949784
The need for having 'proof' before deciding whether something is true of not is a subjective manifestation. Now what?
>>7949787
Subjective as in 'from the subject', not the usual way you guys take it to be, as in something 'relative' and/or 'uncertain'.
>>7948618
Many famous scientists--Newton and Einstein, for example--had a philosophical background, and only nobodies like you think that science isn't completely predicated upon philosophical assumptions.
>>7948571
because it can be scoffed at
>>7949808
They were scientists first.
>>7948571
Probably because 'philosophy' (I think we all know what I mean here, yes if you really want to obfuscate the issue you can consider almost anything philosophy) is sort of a closed off circlejerk.
When Mathematicians circlejerk occasionally they invent a radical idea that allows things that weren't previously possible to be possible.
When Scientists masturbate to their experiments sometimes they discover something that allow shit like telephones, computers, spaceships, airplanes, cars, and nuclear power to happen.
When Philosophers circlejerk they sometimes write a book that other philosophers masturbate to.
>>7949853
No, philosophers invent whole other sciences - physics, psychology, linguistics, computer science, etc.
You'll learn about this when you get to college, son.
sleep tight Plato
>>7949853
When philosophers circlejerk they create entire civilizational foundations. The greeks, confucius, buddhism, the enlightenment...
>>7949863
More probably he'll learn how to drink and to have more contempt for wholly original efforts, or philosophical texts.
After all, if you can't count it in American universities, it has no validity at all.
>>7948571
because they're not studying it for some reason
sleep tight Plato
>>7948571
I don't think they hate the subject, but rather the students get lumped in together with art and humanitarians students
>>7948571
Because not only do they not know that they do not know, but they also do not know that they do not know that they do not know.Seriously
>>7948571
Sleep tight Plato
sleep tight plato
>>7948571
sleep tight Plato
>>7948571
sleep tight Plato
>>7948766
Im double majoring in Philosophy and Biochem and planning on going to med school so fuck off you shitcunt
>>7948644
lol
No philosopher would ever say anything so stupid for starters
>>7948571
sleep tight Plato
>>7948618
If only Leibniz and Descartes understood math, they wouldn't have cared about philosophy.
>>7948655
Or like why things happen, read the new materialists
It's a fucking science man, a fucking science with no fact, no number, no measure-fucking-ment. It is a fucking science of opinions and shit. That's why there is no right, no wrong, no answer in phiphophophy (yeah, intentional typo). The only philosophy that worth reading is something like that of Descartes, you know why? Cause Descartes was a mathematician.
>>7948605
The biggest STEMbot physics and compsci guy I know also studied philosophy.
I don't think you realize science is a branch of philosophy.
>>7948571
Sleep tight Plato
sleep tight Plato
>>7951007
No maggot, that's what phiphophophy faggots say to upgrade their shit. Mofucking sciences are based on fact. Those are more grand-daddy than any mofucking ideas, opinions or any maggot being like you and me. The universe does not give a fuck about your view, your idea or any shit cumming out of you shit head. Science deal with that. And you deal with this, maggot.
sleep tight Plato
>>7951021
Go back to /b/, moron.
>>7948723
>>7948828
/sci/ isn't representative of the public at large. I'll try to answer OP's question.
My personal theory on the issue is that to some degree, the public judges disciplines on what goods it can produce. For example, the natural sciences have made it possible to produce computers and medicines and so on, therefore we ought to recognize them as valuable and getting at the truth. The proof is physically right before us. We don't even need to take the scientists' word that science is getting at the truth, we can see it 'works' by the fact that my television and medicine work.
Social sciences are less capable of doing such a thing, just by the nature of the disciplines. An analysis of cultural norms or discourses won't give us an opportunity to produce something like an iPod, so there is more ambivalence towards its worth as a discipline, regardless of truth-value. Philosophy is perhaps the most extreme case, given how its concerns are often left without definitive answers. If one were to ask a room full of philosophers about some issue (I dunno, maybe about whether moral realism is true), you'd get a handful of differing perspectives, each equipped with intelligent arguments. Some perspectives would maybe be more fleshed out and better argued than others, but you won't get some concrete answer and you certainly won't get a television.
Sleep tight Plato.
>>7948618
you done got baited son
>>7951048
fuck no you bitch. How about you go back to /bitch. That's your place.
>>7950999
Actually Descartes is the point wherein both "science" and "philosophy" becomes completely useless nonsense.
>>7951182
why?
>>7949635
I-is this bait?
tfw you're a STEMfag and you hate everyone in uni cuz they won't into philosophy
>>7948571
Sleep tight plato
>>7948571
Philosophy, like most humanities subjects in modern times, has a bad reputation.
Sleep tight Plato
>>7948571
sleep tight Plato
>>7948571
Sleep tight Plato
>>7948571
sleep tight Plato
Philosophy is the science of opinions.
>>7949811
hahahahaha
Oh wait, you're serious.
>>7948644
>All philosophy is X
>All philosophy is Y
The most obvious sign of idiots who haven't opened a philosophy book in their lives or got memed into reading one in high school with no idea of what they were getting into.
>>7949635
please make this pasta
>>7948644
You have no fucking clue what philosophy is.
None.
>>7949635
This might be the dumbest comment ever posted on 4chan.
>>7948603
>people still go into debt bondage to study at VNIVERSITY getting rused by the priests
>mfw I learned a craft at the guild and have been earning gold since I was a youth
>>7948571
Cause bro, like, what's even the point?
>>7948925
>Same with poetry. It might have been fine if it weren't for poets
These days everyday people instantly associate the word "poetry" with really snarky and insufferable faux revolutionary slam poets. It was fun while it lasted I guess..
>>7948571
This is only the case in America, the world leader in anti-intellectualism.
>>7950999
There is "no right, no wrong answer in philosophy" because philosophy is where you go to question everything. So where other disciplines have a set criteria to determine definite right and wrong answers( until you get to the higher level where at best you have better and worse theories with nothing definite) Philosophers are the people who question those set criteria and justify new sets.
On the other hand. If you go around violating the principle of non-contradiction without explicitly arguing why it doesn't have to hold, or make arguments that are not deductively valid while acting like they are you will flunk out. If you are overly obscure, if you can't make coherent arguments, etc, you will flunk out.
In my philosophy department you actually can't graduate without doing a course in logic, because they want to ensure that students are rigorous and can move beyond unjustifed opinion. It is also common that people combine Philosophy and Physics degrees because the two work together well.
But you've probably never even taken a philosophy class past the first year.
>>7948644
This is (as illustrated pretty clearly by the belligerent and visibly thoughtless responses) pretty much one hundred percent true. It makes a few implications that are less than true (other things have more meaning than philosophy, rational application is the height of worth) but the core statement is absolutely accurate: Philosophy has no visible practical application and, thus, most people have no use for it. It's esoteric, byzantine and frequently deals at great length with things most people never even think about. Philosophy is full of angry, neurally atypical outcasts who strive for a coat of vindication to paint over their inability to interface with everyone else. Philosophy forces painfully, irrationally and even viciously logical truths into the field of view, and many people wonder why something so light is being moved with such force when they already knew it was there and they rather liked where it was.
Many of the epiphilactic moments of philosophy are self-evident: the cruelty of man, the ennui of what passes for a soul, the deep, coruscating vine of our nervous system and its corded embrace with every higher function. No one truly believes all humans are always kind, everyone clings desperately to the search for meaning and there is no person who has not felt their visceral need well up behind their hands.
Philosophy is full of people who stand on a box and scream 'the sun is bright' while everyone else just looks at the ground because they know it hurts their eyes.
>>7948571
The philosophy of science is concerned with the observable, the how of things. Or more precisely, the elimination of the unobservable.
Philosophy of mind, of aesthetics, or of human purpose and human action is studied plenty. But it hasn't changed our world so quickly or completely as science has.
I suspect that very soon this field will become much more important than we've recognized. Humans in the first world are out of balance, and the sword of technology is slipping out of our grasp every year.
Sleep tight Plato.
>>7948828
>Physicist: Engineers are faggots.
>Mathematicians: Engineers are faggots.
>Computer "Scientists": Engineers are faggots.
>Chemists: Engineers are faggots.
>Geologists: Engineers are faggots.
>Engineers: Guilty aths charged you guiths!
>Biologists: Biology is a s-science too h-honest!
Fixed.
>>7948603
I just laughed for a solid 3 minutes
>>7948603
>tfw you'll never be paid 300 florins to master the secrets of alchemy
>>7948571
Wow, this board has gone to shit. You should all be ashamed of yourselves, because no one of you read and so consequently you are idiots.
Don't think your unread opinion has any merit. No matter how smart you are you will still be an idiot if you don't read and all you will accomplish 9 times out of 10 is to discourage the few people here that actually does read to stay away -- and then everyone will be the worse for it.
Now, the reason philosophy is scoffed at by those who don't study it is twofold i would say.
1) They haven't read any philosophy(just like 99% of the people in this thread) and they believe philosophy isn't relevant because science has replaced it. They don't understand the difference between being able to think yourself & argue with others in a sane way vs reading pop science news and (perhaps) being a specialist in some technical field. If you lazy fucks read 10 texts of Plato you would start to realize the value of philosophy.
2) Philosophy, which originally meant the love of wisdom in ancient greece, has been bastardized into some PC nonsense by the feminism movement in many universities. This is regrettable, however it doesn't take anything away from the magnificence of the original texts if one choose to self-study.
Now go READ. You need to READ to be on the LITERATURE board.
>>7948571
Good night pupper
>>7948603
>>7951513
>>7951677
>not voyaging to the byzantines to serve as a mercenary in the Basileus' guard
400 hyperperon starting, all the courtesans you can muster and the satisfaction of pillaging the infidels in Særkland
>>7951740
>charity queens are actually proud to fight mohammedans for the emperor's olive oil
Sleep Tight Plato
>>7951740
The Long Ships is so amazingly comfy
>>7948571
Sleep tight Plato.
>>7948571
sleep tight Plato
>>7951767
kek
>>7948571
Gegek
>>7951990
What in the fuck is "Persian fire"? Did they mean Greek fire?
>>7952006
wikipedia says the greek fire made so great an impression on crusaders that the name was used for other fire weapons, even if they weren't greek. Maybe persians had some kind of fire based weapon, such as this sweet middle aged flamethrower.
>>7952025
But greek fire was a medieval weapon, and Persia was subjugated by arabs, then turks and then mongols at that point in history.
There is certainly nothing like that in what I've read of ancient history.
>>7952006
"when the sex was good but you realise Greek fire can't melt Greek marble" doesn't sound as good. Plus the 9/11 terrorists were more or less persian and greeks represent western culture. Also it's a picture I found on 4chan.
Philosophy is unavoidable. You can either do it well or you can do it badly the choice is yours.
>>7948571
sleep tight Plato
>>7948571
read Aristophanes clouds for an ancient parody of philosophers & socrates
tl;dr philosophy is seen by the outside world as preoccupied with trivial, meaningless details that have little application to practical science
tl;dr "you're just saying words"
>>7953167
You could say the same about comedians, that they purposely trivialize and distort serious things to get a cheap laugh, but we know this is not completely true.
sleep tight Plato
>>7948571
1. it doesn't make money
2. it doesn't make people happy
3. it doesn't save lives
4. most people can't into it
That's what 99.9% of the population cares about: what makes money, what makes them happy, and what saves lives. The rest just don't get it, so they ignore it, or feel insulted by it.
>>7948571
Thinking abstractly is a slippery slope to a lot of people. Some translate philosophy no more than a stoner looking out a window.
sleep tight plato
>>7953417
>1. it doesn't make money
>2. it doesn't make people happy
>3. it doesn't save lives
>4. most people can't into it
are you saying these things are true or that those are the things people think
>>7953167
good point/ref
also worth noting that a big reason for people not liking philosophy in our particular circumstances is economic demand (they think they cannot stay out of poverty learning philosophy, let alone doing it) and ideology/politics (especially in the US and a little bit in Europe, philosophy is widely considered to be inherently leftist).
>>7951007
>>7951048
Bollocks.
The only philosophy based on indisputable fact is nihilism. And that's barely a philosophy, because it destroys anything it comes into contact with, including itself. It's philosophy's anti-matter.
Philosophy is nothing but imaginary questions about imaginary concepts. Imaginary questions we like, because we are ourselves imaginary beings. In the sense that while we are physical meat, our minds and personalities are products of our imaginations (and this is a really awkward statement, but i cannot think of a better way of putting it. I'm sure you're all smart enough to figure out what i mean).
If you were capable of viewing the world through a lens of pure, unfeeling, robot logic the whole lot of it would be worthless. Just like everything else is worthless to a being of pure, unfeeling robot logic.
>>7953895
>The only philosophy based on indisputable fact is nihilism.
smoking hot (philosophical) assumptions about the nature of fact and disputation.
>Philosophy is nothing but imaginary questions about imaginary concepts.
If you mean by imaginary that someone had to come up with the idea, then this is true of all concepts and all language irrespective of what bucket it gets thrown in, not just philosophy. That is, it includes science. Ever heard of logical positivism? They're the paragons of stemlord thought and they knew the processes of science were wholly reducible to marrying concepts to language describing observation. In other words if you want to get ride of imaginary questions and imaginary concepts, guess you have to toss out electron too.
>In the sense that while we are physical meat, our minds and personalities are products of our imaginations
Congrats, you can recognize one of the oldest (philosophical) dualisms ever, mind vs body or matter or neurological process, whatever floats your little boat. You're expressing nothing here of any meaning to the merit of philosophy.
>If you were capable of viewing the world through a lens of pure, unfeeling, robot logic the whole lot of it would be worthless.
I take that by saying "if," that you recognize the plain fact that this is humanly impossible. So why bring it up?
pal if you're gonna be a AI worshipping materialist at least do your homework
>>7953895
Go back to /b/, moron.
>>7953937
> I take that by saying "if," that you recognize the plain fact that this is humanly impossible. So why bring it up?
You've mistaken me as dissing philosophy, when i'm dissing the idea of it being science. not the same thing.
The point is that while philosophy itself is meaningful, it isn't in any way scientific, because at its purest science is basically maths and you cannot describe the human condition and thought and emotion in maths.
there is only one correct answer.
>>7948571
Because most people measure their success in monetary terms and philosophy doesn't have much value in those terms.
>>7953948
You have absolutely no clue what philosophy is.
>>7953882
It's what most people think, because for most people, philosophy doesn't do any of those things.
>>7953948
sleep tight Plato
>>7948571
sleep tight Plato
>>7953895
>The only philosophy based on indisputable fact is nihilism.
>>7949635
>philosophers obscure their writings
confirmed for failing kant class that one time
>>7951721
dont fuckin tell me what to do
>>7954071
as if nihilism isn't just elite atheist-ism
you have the fanciest fedora, well done faggot
>>7954193
Nihilism and atheism are both unwarranted conclusions.
You are right, scepticism is truly the crown jewel of philosophy.
>>7948571
Sleep tight Plato
They don't see immediate application for it so it's useless. Kind of reminds me of people who don't see a point in space or getting farther out there. It's not always the destination, but building and researching has helped us immensely.
>>7948571
No real application, nor use to it, nor any real prevalence in the real world.
It's pretty much just brain gymnastics (maybe not the best choice of words) that people abuse and make themselves sound smart by referencing Nietzche and Plato in between liberal arts classes.
Also, a lot of philosophers tend to be depressing, sad, or just blue a lot, which is a negative and doesn't benefit philosophy's attempt to be relevant with little pros but tons of cons.
