What use is philosophy in this day and age when science exists?Don't try to pretend Philosophy is nearly as important in this day and age.

Name
Email
Subject
Comment *
File	Select/drop/paste files here
* = required field	[▶ Show post options & limits] Confused? See the FAQ.

Embed	(replaces files and can be used instead)
Options	Do not bump (you can also write sage in the email field) Spoiler images (this replaces the thumbnails of your images with question marks)
Password	(For file and post deletion.)
Allowed file types: jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webm, mp4 Max filesize is 8 MB. Max image dimensions are 10000 x 10000. You may upload 1 per post.

File: 1427434793419.jpg (232.02 KB, 1536x1024, 3:2, o-RICHARD-DAWKINS-RACIST-f….jpg)

Anonymous 03/27/15 (Fri) 05:39:53 No.1021

What use is philosophy in this day and age when science exists?
Don't try to pretend Philosophy is nearly as important in this day and age.

Anonymous 03/27/15 (Fri) 12:38:10 No.1034

File: 1427459890337.png (179.21 KB, 348x349, 348:349, 1360563870176.png)

Oh yeah, well if Stephen Hawking is so smart, why is he crippled, huh?

Anonymous 03/27/15 (Fri) 21:11:00 No.1047

File: 1427490660296.jpg (44.45 KB, 666x498, 111:83, asutois.jpg)

>>1021
science cannot cut its umbilical cord from philosophy.
epistemology: the study of what we can know. this is the foundation of all academia.
metaphysics: the study of the world and how it works. science is a subfield of this.

observation of particular things is something a camera can do.
assessing the truth value of a proposition by assessing the validity of the argument made in support of the proposition is what philosophers do. it's not like we don't make observations of the external world.

it's not like scientists don't make sound arguments either. the fields are inseparable. it's a matter of specialization.

philosophers tend to study the scientific field that's related to their specialty. a professor who studies and lectures on metaphysics and philosophy of mind and body will very likely study any materials about the brain and how it functions.

personally, i've seen some ineptitude from scientists, though. they seem to think they know it all because science.

science is a field of knowledge. if you have a grasp of epistemology, you'll understand why what niel says in pic related is stupid.

Anonymous 03/27/15 (Fri) 22:50:48 No.1048

>>1021
Because science doesn't, can't, and won't ever be able to answer all questions about anything I could ask.

The unknown exists-- in the mind and in the world-- and philosophy exists to traverse that, it always has, always will.

Anonymous 03/28/15 (Sat) 06:37:10 No.1065

>>1047
>why what niel says in pic related is stupid
I think he just has a very specific definition of "believe" and a very strong one of "science". He's saying that what science uncovers are facts that remains so independently of what people desire them to be. He naturally assumes that facts of science are the only kind of facts, but that does not make his statement untrue within the scientific understanding (where, incidentally, facts are situational as well).

>>1048
Though I think I'm on board, you are essentially saying that science is limited and philosophy fills the gaps, because we don't want gaps. I assume you don't mean that philosophy just fills them up, but that it actively tries to do so (but tends to fail). But for scientifically minded people, that is not a good argument for philosophy in the slightest.

Playing devil's advocat, btw. Something science doesn't tend to do because it feels comfortable leaning on what it thinks it has sufficiently established.

Anonymous 03/28/15 (Sat) 21:07:32 No.1083

>>1047
>scientific theories are never false

This is what that dumb nigger is implying.