So why does /sci/ hate philosophy and philosophers so much?
>>7724518
It doesn't. We routinely have threads on the philosophy of science.
If you're hurt that people tell you to fuck off, maybe what you're putting forward isn't philosophy, but senseless babble.
It's like when people tell popscientists babbling about quantum magic to fuck off. It's not that they hate science and scientists so much, they hate meaningless drivel.
>>7724518
like 95% of philosophy majors are pre-law(read: useless) and therefore not /sci/ related in any way. nobody even talks about it. good luck finding a philosophy major that is also a maths double major or something.
>>7724518
this guy had healthy view on science, merely a tool, you faggots put on pedestal.
>>7724518
We don't. But when you argue philosophy in place of science thinking you're saying anything we haven't heard before, you demonstrate how unprepared you are to have the conversation you're trying to have, so much so that you don't even know what preparedness would sound or look like. So we tell you to piss off.
>>7724549
>good luck
out of the 8 people in my math year, one of them is a philosophy double major and another is a logician as well
>>7724518
Because philosophers on this board are like children wandering into z room where grown ups are talking and expecting everyone to shut up and listen to his two cents. Then as we listen we find out those two cents aren't even cents. They're pesos.
>>7724566
>>7724563
/thread
I hate philosophers who view science as a mere tool and an incomplete philosophical way of thinking. They also feel as special snowflakes and are really adamant to any sort of criticism and dismiss anyone who has not read his special book of philosophy.
In essence I hate philosophy undergrads, but that could by said about any undergrad desu senpai.
>>7724566
>philosophy
>not an important tool
That's just retarded. Though in some respects now antiquated by modern science, philosophy will always deserve respect. Questioning reality and nature in the pursuit of knowledge and understanding is rooted in philosophy. Mathematics and geometry came from philosophers. Logic came from philosophers. Even if they weren't always right, philosophers took the first steps towards science. If humans had not developed philosophy, we would not have developed science.
>>7724776
>They took the first steps! We owe them respect!
>Philosophy
>An important tool
never gets old
>>7724583
Rofl
>>7724518
50 years of positivist poison injected in western culture will do that.
>>7724776
But, do you agree that it would benefit the subject if it made a radical change in their structure of operation? I think they are too stubborn to change some methods used to seak truth and analyze the mind. Keeping in mind dualism is still used in some
continental schools or that this postmodern shit that shits on the scientific method without a clear understanding of the subject.
Philosophy has always changed its principles and method, but it seems to be stagnating in our modern times, maybe we should just completely branch the subject so people can get clearer look as to what it proposes and we get specialists for subjects that require much study
>>7724792
Why do people still think the scientific method follows from the positivist school?
>>7724800
This is a fair point.
I've talked to many people who would love to learn more about philosophy, but cannot because the only philosophy available to them is the same regurgitated and debunked Marxist opinions time after time after time.
Academic incest has effectively killed philosophy.
>>7724806
>scientific method follows from the positivist school
How is that even remotely close to what I said? What the fuck is wrong with you?
>>7724815
I infered from your answer in a reasonable way. Maybe you do not know how to articulate your words desu sempi.
>>7724822
>I infered from your answer in a reasonable way
>reasonable way
Hahahahahahahaha...
Yep, it seems that way.
>>7724827
Ur a poppy head
HA
>>7724800
You have a very ill formed definition of philosophy. Philosophy is a quest for objectivity just like science, that's why science was derived from philosophy. The philosophical method is much broader than the scientific one, applicable to human affairs and even to worlds that aren't actual, that's the power of introspection. You conclude that philosophical discourses are subjective and based on men because of your preconceived notion of sense data as the only source of objectivity, a notion derived from the philosophical method, after all you can't empirically verify that statement. But that assumption is what give scientific discourse the objective status, a assumption that every scientist in a lab makes even though they're not even aware of, the epistemic framework of science has a philosophical foundation.
If you want to criticize philosophers try to analyze their claims from a philosophical perspective, because if your definition of objectivity is sense data then of course you're gonna think they're bullshitting you. But they're not, they're trying to do the same thing a chemist does in a lab, the problem is that is a lot harder to have that objective ground in philosophical subjects, you can't really use the sense data assumption when dealing with mental states now can't you?
To be fair with you there's a lot of philosophies out there that are actually bullshit, because you don't really have a rigorous definition of objectivity like science does, then people go wild and claim they're telling the truth. But a scientist to deny the importance of philosophy is simply madness, science is permeated with philosophical assumptions, and being ignorant of them and philosophy in general may get you in epistemological troubles.
We mainly hate pseudo-intellectual undergrads who come to /sci/ believing they're polymaths and their kindergarten tier philosophy is purest wisdom.
>>7724840
While I agree I'm not that informed with philosophical affairs, you say that a scientist can run into trouble if you lack a philosophical mind. But science has advanced with and without philosophy and many great scientists had little interest in philosophy, so just plain results show that the scientific method works far better than philosophy.
You may say I'm still falling behind my empirical reasoning by calling out tangible evidence but in this case it should have an upper hand. The fact that we use the results brought up by the scientific method shows they work much more better to model reality.
Human mind has much more limitations than you think.
>>7724897
the scientific method is philosophy, it's informed by philosophical reasoning independent of anything science without philosophy could ever produce.
>>7725662
The scientific method does not involve any philosophy. It's just common sense, i.e. the opposite of philosophy actually.
A theist rationalist Humanities Professor was teaching a class on Plato, known non-logical positivist
”Before the class begins, you must get on your knees and worship Plato and accept that he was the most highly-evolved being the world has ever known, even greater than Newton!”
At this moment, an emotionless, Vulcan, logical postivist STEM major who had watched all episodes of Bill Nye the science guy and understood the necessity of Empiricism and fully supported everything Neil deGrasse Tyson ever said held up a copy of Phenomenology of the Spirit.
”How does any of this crap make sense?”
The arrogant professor smirked quite post-modernly and smugly replied “Of course not! Truth is entirely subjective, you stupid STEMfag”
”Wrong. The basis for truth is to test something 5,000 times with double blind experiments in a lab. If I can't see it.... then it isn't there!”
The professor was visibly shaken, and dropped his chalk and copy of Thus Spoke Zarathustra. He stormed out of the room crying those continental tears, which just shows that he was still being controlled by his emotions. There is no doubt that at this point our professor, some gay Frenchman, wished he had pulled himself up by his bootstraps and become more than a sophist philosophy professor. He wished so much that he had a gun to shoot himself from embarrassment, but he himself denied causality having read Hume!
The students applauded and all changed their degrees to STEM, though all of them would fail to find employment as the market was oversaturated, and accepted Sam Harris as their Lord and Saviour. An eagle named “Empiricism” flew into the room and perched atop a copy of Principia de Mathematica and shed a tear on the chalk. The Bill Nye the Science Guy theme was sung several times, and Steven Hawking himself showed up to explain how science has replaced philosophy.
The professor lost his tenure and was fired the next day. He died of an existentialist crisis.
>>7724518
Philosophy has always been hated, it goes around asking questions that in the end reveal the shaky and illogical foundation of someone's thinking - scientists, politicians or whatever. It is to expect that people will not be happy when someone sticks around asking questions for which you have no answer, but in the end it has helped to make progress - it gave us science and modern logics for example, and indirectly has, somehow, contributed to both in their development.
>>7726836
WEW LAD
W E W
E------E
W E W L A D
L-------L
A------A
D------D
