16 replies to this topic

[The Immortalist]

I've never read any sort of philosophical works in my life. I don't even know anything about Aristotle or any of those guy's lol. It just seems to me that philosophy is a form of pseudoscience that was created before modern science was created. So is philosophy worth reading about?

[Lufega]

I think so. When I took the class, I went in a Catholic, came out an Atheist. Total win!

Of all the books I read, I kept one that I browse from time to time. It's called "The Enchiridion" by Epictetus.

[Brainbox]

Yes.

Pseudo science is a bit of a drastic qualification. Pre science would be more accurate I guess. In historical perspective there was religion / faith, then philosophy / rational reasoning then science as we know it today / measuring. A move from internal values to external values. From believing to thinking to sensing. I think (yes) we should not forget the old fashioned thinking, starting with reading "old" philosophy works.

[Arch_NME]

I'm not even sure if philosophy claims to be a "science" in any way. It's obviously really not one. It’s more just a term for talking about the meaning of life and what words like “knowledge” or “exist” truly mean. I don't enjoy philosophy as a school subject because it's a lot of just boring memorization of who wrote what and when. I do enjoy the occasionally philosophical discussion though. Reading a few books on the subject might give you a jumping off point for engaging in such interesting discussions. That might make it worthwhile, however you could skip the reading and just turn to the guy next to you and ask him why he thinks’ he's here.

Edited by Arch_NME, 11 January 2012 - 03:14 PM.

[Danail Bulgaria]

The philosophical works are not something that will make You an immortal, if this is what You are asking.

[Marios Kyriazis]

If you like to explore advanced (complex and/or uncommon) subjects, you will realise that there is a point where philosophy, religion and science meet and share frontiers.

The science of immortality would be hard pushed to survive if philosophy (or religion) are not to form part of it.

[The Immortalist]

The philosophical works are not something that will make You an immortal, if this is what You are asking.

No that's not what I'm asking at all. What I'm asking is what is the value of the great philosophical works other than as a historical record of pre-science? We should all definitely not forget all of the works of the greatest philosophers but other than that it just seems to me that they still exist as more of a museum exhibit than anything else -

"Wow so that's what they thought back then. That's pretty neat! Too bad they were misguided by conjecturing how reality works instead of actually doing real experiments to explore reality".

[Arceupins]

It just seems to me that philosophy is a form of pseudoscience that was created before modern science was created.

Philosophy is in no way a pseudoscience. The task of philosophy is to framework fundamental ideas like consciousness, reality, knowledge, ethics, and meaning, without making prior assumptions. For instance:

'Why do I exist rather than not?' (consciousness)
'Does an objective reality exist apart from me, or are the things I perceive constructs of my consciousness' (reality)
'How can I know that I really know the answers to these questions?' (knowledge)
'Am I right in asking these questions?' (ethics)
'What does it mean to be 'right'? (meaning)

Essentially philosophers ask 'Why?' (I remember reading a quote from a comedian that went something like 'Philosophers are the people who never quite grew up', alluding to the tendency for children to respond answers with 'Why?' ad infinitum).

Philosophy is dichotomous with religion in that the former is fundamentally grounded in reason and logic, and the latter in arbitrary belief. The ubiquity of religion in society stems from people's tendency to form assumptions (beliefs) rather than questions.

Philosophy is idyllic, concerned with the idea of absolute truth. Science is the practical application of its ideas to the physical world. It is dependant on the answers of philosophers past. In fact, there is an academic field dedicated to the connection between the two, unsurprisingly called 'the philosophy of science'. The efforts of intellectuals like Karl Popper has been to strengthen the philosophical foundation of science (falsifiability as part of the scientific method) to ensure the accuracy and verifiability of scientific observations.

Hope this helps.

[hivemind]

I think philosophy is interesting. I have read some philosophy because I got interested in it. However, I am not interested in getting a formal education and a degree in philosophy.

Edited by hivemind, 12 January 2012 - 03:43 AM.

[Arceupins]

I think philosophy is interesting. I have read some philosophy because I got interested in it. However, I am not interested in getting a formal education and a degree in philosophy.

I've often thought undergrads studying philosophy are exactly the kind of people who shouldn't.

Investing $40k+ in a useless qualification demonstrates how little value they place on reason.

[platypus]

Study some but work more on natural sciences, which are way more interesting IMO.

[shadowhawk]

All these opinions are philosophical in nature. Enjoy what ever interests you.

[1thoughtMaze1]

It just seems to me that philosophy is a form of pseudoscience that was created before modern science was created.

Philosophy is in no way a pseudoscience. The task of philosophy is to framework fundamental ideas like consciousness, reality, knowledge, ethics, and meaning, without making prior assumptions. For instance:

'Why do I exist rather than not?' (consciousness)
'Does an objective reality exist apart from me, or are the things I perceive constructs of my consciousness' (reality)
'How can I know that I really know the answers to these questions?' (knowledge)
'Am I right in asking these questions?' (ethics)
'What does it mean to be 'right'? (meaning)

Essentially philosophers ask 'Why?' (I remember reading a quote from a comedian that went something like 'Philosophers are the people who never quite grew up', alluding to the tendency for children to respond answers with 'Why?' ad infinitum).

Philosophy is dichotomous with religion in that the former is fundamentally grounded in reason and logic, and the latter in arbitrary belief. The ubiquity of religion in society stems from people's tendency to form assumptions (beliefs) rather than questions.

Philosophy is idyllic, concerned with the idea of absolute truth. Science is the practical application of its ideas to the physical world. It is dependant on the answers of philosophers past. In fact, there is an academic field dedicated to the connection between the two, unsurprisingly called 'the philosophy of science'. The efforts of intellectuals like Karl Popper has been to strengthen the philosophical foundation of science (falsifiability as part of the scientific method) to ensure the accuracy and verifiability of scientific observations.

Hope this helps.

Yes very well said, in many cases philosophical concepts are the very basis for scientific research. I mean not all science comes from science, much science come from thought which it's self is an abstract philosophical concept. there are so many questions that can not be answered scientifically, for example scientists have made great advances in how DNA works, but they have no clue why it works. Another example, this formula theoretically describes a perfect circle, x^2+y^2=2, but we can never represent a perfect circle in reality, it is impossible. now since we have the capability to conceptualizer a perfect circle, but can never represent it physically, is there a place where this perfect circle can exist? Outside of physical reality. For those who are not familiar I am referring to the Platonic world of mathematical forms, a phylesophical concept deeply rooted in human history, going back thousands of years.

Philosophy is a very important intellectual concept that is, in my opinion, fundemental to human progress and survival. If you think about it philosophy could very well be the grandfather of all scientific knowledge. Doing undergrad studies in any subject is "boring" because you are but merely learning the basic fundemental concepts of the field. It's not in till you reach the masters and Phd levels where you can actually fundamentally understand the implications of your field.

and I'm not a philosophy major by the way.

[1thoughtMaze1]

I've never read any sort of philosophical works in my life. I don't even know anything about Aristotle or any of those guy's lol. It just seems to me that philosophy is a form of pseudoscience that was created before modern science was created. So is philosophy worth reading about?

It just seems to me that philosophy is a form of pseudoscience that was created before modern science was created.

Philosophy is in no way a pseudoscience. The task of philosophy is to framework fundamental ideas like consciousness, reality, knowledge, ethics, and meaning, without making prior assumptions. For instance:

'Why do I exist rather than not?' (consciousness)
'Does an objective reality exist apart from me, or are the things I perceive constructs of my consciousness' (reality)
'How can I know that I really know the answers to these questions?' (knowledge)
'Am I right in asking these questions?' (ethics)
'What does it mean to be 'right'? (meaning)

Essentially philosophers ask 'Why?' (I remember reading a quote from a comedian that went something like 'Philosophers are the people who never quite grew up', alluding to the tendency for children to respond answers with 'Why?' ad infinitum).

Philosophy is dichotomous with religion in that the former is fundamentally grounded in reason and logic, and the latter in arbitrary belief. The ubiquity of religion in society stems from people's tendency to form assumptions (beliefs) rather than questions.

Philosophy is idyllic, concerned with the idea of absolute truth. Science is the practical application of its ideas to the physical world. It is dependant on the answers of philosophers past. In fact, there is an academic field dedicated to the connection between the two, unsurprisingly called 'the philosophy of science'. The efforts of intellectuals like Karl Popper has been to strengthen the philosophical foundation of science (falsifiability as part of the scientific method) to ensure the accuracy and verifiability of scientific observations.

Hope this helps.

Yes very well said, in many cases philosophical concepts are the very basis for scientific research. I mean not all science comes from science, much science come from thought which it's self is an abstract philosophical concept. there are so many questions that can not be answered scientifically, for example scientists have made great advances in how DNA works, but they have no clue why it works. Another example, this formula theoretically describes a perfect circle, x^2+y^2=2, but we can never represent a perfect circle in reality, it is impossible. now since we have the capability to conceptualizer a perfect circle, but can never represent it physically, is there a place where this perfect circle can exist? Outside of physical reality. For those who are not familiar I am referring to the Platonic world of mathematical forms, a phylesophical concept deeply rooted in human history, going back thousands of years.

Philosophy is a very important intellectual concept that is, in my opinion, fundemental to human progress and survival. If you think about it philosophy could very well be the grandfather of all scientific knowledge. Doing undergrad studies in any subject is "boring" because you are but merely learning the basic fundemental concepts of the field. It's not in till you reach the masters and Phd levels where you can actually fundamentally understand the implications of your field.

and I'm not a philosophy major by the way.

[Elus]

I've never read any sort of philosophical works in my life. I don't even know anything about Aristotle or any of those guy's lol. It just seems to me that philosophy is a form of pseudoscience that was created before modern science was created. So is philosophy worth reading about?

I would say some of it is fascinating. But definitely look into logic! I'm taking that class right now, and annoying as it may be sometimes, it's really helping me see things, well...more logically.

[Metraphop]

Agreeing with Arceupins and their explination.

Logic and Science run hand in hand. I'm not talking logic as in Sherlock Holmes, I'm talking the study of valid reasoning. Now, to answer the Original poster's question, do I think it's important to learn at least some Philosophy? Yeah, really important.

I mean, it's a vast world. It's going to be confusing, from bouncing from something like Socrates over to "the philosophy of star trek," right? I think it's really important to look up logical fallacies, if nothing else, only because it's a fantastic benefit to you. It'll give you the tools to justify your own beliefs, and to check them against valid reasoning.

So yes, OP, I think it's pretty important!

[platypus]

I think a few university-level courses should be sufficient. I'd put more emphasis on natural sciences and math myself.