Mentioning Phil phD's

[KrazyHorse]

NYE, I'm aware of the usual education path...

[KrazyHorse]

We could do with a government dominated by scientists. But those same scientists are usually busy with more worthwhile work. At least, the good ones are...

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Frogger

I think this would have required monumental conceptual shifts and other difficulties

As opposed to the conceptual shift required by the Lorentz transformations?

My remark was in the context of anti-realist conceptions of science, so I'm not sure what your point is here.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by obiwan18


Agathon:
There is another solution that harmonises your position with proper public funding.

Not all research has a direct application, though future research will often rely upon a previously useless discovery.

Therefore, it stands to reason that disinterested inquiry can produce definitive benefits not sought by the original researcher. This is why you fund philosophy, in that leaving the philosophers alone, they come up with something others find useful.

No field can properly operate without some form of philosophy, be it ethics, or otherwise. In asking questions about these moral concepts, philosophers can unearth presuppositions and assumptions previously unchallenged.

So there you go. Two 'real world' benefits of disinterested philosophical discourse.

Fair enough. I'd also add that the quest for knowledge can be regarded as an end in itself. A large number of people are just curious - I think that is one of our finest human attributes.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Asher
The context of this thread never was about philosophy being useful in the past, although several attempts by several people have tried to turn it that way since it's much easier to prove that.

It was in part because, in the absence of other arguments, the notion that it has been useful in the past is a good pointer to it being useful in the future. The problem with trying to point out contemporary philosophy which has had some effect on society is that philosophical revolutions tend to seep very slowly into the public conciousness. We are still, to a certain extent, playing out some of the changes inaugurated by the age of reason, by philosophers like Rousseau and Kant.

Here's a few examples of philosophy affecting contemporary issues (and not always for the better, I might add).

(1) The work of Will Kymlicka, a Canadian philosopher, is required reading for people that are going to deal with issues of multiculturalism. He is kind of the standard guy to read. I've come across him being mentioned in all sorts of areas outside philosophy.

(2) Rawls' theory of justice. Probably the most influential writings on justice in the 20th century, these are the backbone of the justification of welfare state capitalism as an economic and political system. Again, if you read books in political theory you will find Rawls name again and again.

(3) The later work of Ludwig Wittgenstein which inaugurated a whole new way of looking at language. There is an interesting dialogue between some of the people who study Wittgenstein and those who study the behaviour of primates.

(4) Peter Singer's book "Animal Liberation" (which I detest) - the bible of the animal rights movement.

(5) "Postmodernism". Again I detest this because I think it isn't real philosophy, but there is no doubt that charlatans like Derrida and Foucault have had immense influence on literature and the arts.

(6) The cognitive revolution. Philosophers have played a large role in this and cognitive science is part philosophy, part psychology, part computer science, without really being any one of them.

These are real effects. I'm not claiming that philosophy is the salvation of the world, but it has an important role to play, which is constantly changing. A hundred and fifty years ago, philosophers saw themselves as providing the world with metaphysical theories about the ultimate nature of reality. In the English speaking world that picture of philosophy has fallen out of favour. The current project of philosophy is largely that of conceptual analysis. Large scale theorising a la Plato or Kant has fallen out of favour. For example, there is a large literature on the concept of "cause" - trying to sort out a rationally satisfactory notion of cause has proved harder than people thought.

Other than this, philosophy departments are to an extent storehouses of the history of ideas. You mentioned somewhere that history was useful or we would be doomed to repeat it - that to me is a powerful reason for keeping people around who can say, read Plato in the original language, or explain how Hobbes was influenced by the political climate of his time. (if for no other reason to tell Frogger that his copy of the Republic is probably the diabolical Lee translation, which is extremely misleading).

I certainly don't think that we should have any more philosophy in universities (although I think courses in critical reasoning should be introduced in primary and high schools) so I am in the somewhat unique position of being an academic who doesn't think that his department should be given lots more money and take up a pre-eminent position in the university. We get quite enough. I happen to think that more needs to be put into pure science, so that science departments don't have to strike demonic bargains with outside companies.

But there you go, that's my opinion.

Anyway, Asher, let's ask you what the point of your research is.

[Asher]

Anyway, Asher, let's ask you what the point of your research is.

I'm an undergrad, I don't do research.

And if you wonder what the point of research in computer science is, I'm wondering if you're trying to make a joke.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Asher

I'm an undergrad, I don't do research.

And if you wonder what the point of research in computer science is, I'm wondering if you're trying to make a joke.

No, not really, I'm just interested. Most people think they have a good idea of what goes on in other people's disciplines when they don't really (witness some of the comments on philosophy from those who don't do it); so I am just interested.

I mean most people probably think that CS students sit around endlessly making little dots move across screens.

[KrazyHorse]

Whatever context it was said in,

one reaction to the Michelson-Morley experiment would have been to complicate the ether theory in such a way as to keep it (I think this would have required monumental conceptual shifts and other difficulties)

Doesn't make sense as far as saying that dumping the ether was easier conceptually than accepting Lorentz transforms as true.

SR is simpler, but harder to understand than adapting ether-based transmission of light would have been...

[Asher]

CS is a very new field, we're still making huge progress every year.

It depends on which discipline of CS on the type of research.

The theory people are working on much more efficient algorithms (almost all the algorithms we use today are incredibly inefficient still), looking at ways to represent different kinds of data in a computer,ways to test for computability (Turing was just the tip of the iceburg), computing on quantum computers, that kind of thing.

The graphics guys are developing new ways to do real-time 3D graphics on computers -- there's tremendous progress in this field in the past 10 years especially.

Then there's the study of AI, which is still in its infancy.

Distributed computing research, how to get computers working together across the globe...

Cryptography...

Human-Computer Interfaces (voice recognition, video recognition, UI design, 3D UIs, holographic display interaction, even "mind reading")

My university's compsci research page is here with more information: http://www.cpsc.ucalgary.ca/Research/

CS is one of the fields where private sector research is huge as well, and to see what they do in the private sector, here is a good start.... http://research.microsoft.com/research/projects/

[Kontiki]

Originally posted by Agathon
I mean most people probably think that CS students sit around endlessly making little dots move across screens.

I thought that CS students sit around and figure out how to get members of the opposite sex to never talk to them.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Frogger
Whatever context it was said in,

one reaction to the Michelson-Morley experiment would have been to complicate the ether theory in such a way as to keep it (I think this would have required monumental conceptual shifts and other difficulties)

Doesn't make sense as far as saying that dumping the ether was easier conceptually than accepting Lorentz transforms as true.

SR is simpler, but harder to understand than adapting ether-based transmission of light would have been...

I don't know. I think that there would have had to have been much revision given the results of the experiment. Perhaps that was a bad choice of example as it requires too much speculation. The mailbox example makes the same point with a mundane case.

It still doesn't affect my basic point, which is that an infinite number of theories will fit the observable facts - the basis of all good pragmatist philosophies of science.

[Dr Strangelove]

Originally posted by Rogan Josh
I am a doctor of philosophy. What's your problem?

Hey! Me too! I'm a MD - PhD.

[KrazyHorse]

which is that an infinite number of theories will fit the observable facts - the basis of all good pragmatist philosophies of science

That's a great big "duh" for the same reason that I can draw an infinite number of curves through any set of points.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Asher
CS is a very new field, we're still making huge progress every year.

It depends on which discipline of CS on the type of research.

The theory people are working on much more efficient algorithms (almost all the algorithms we use today are incredibly inefficient still), looking at ways to represent different kinds of data in a computer,ways to test for computability (Turing was just the tip of the iceburg), computing on quantum computers, that kind of thing.

The graphics guys are developing new ways to do real-time 3D graphics on computers -- there's tremendous progress in this field in the past 10 years especially.

Then there's the study of AI, which is still in its infancy.

Distributed computing research, how to get computers working together across the globe...

Cryptography...

Human-Computer Interfaces (voice recognition, video recognition, UI design, 3D UIs, holographic display interaction, even "mind reading")

My university's compsci research page is here with more information: http://www.cpsc.ucalgary.ca/Research/

CS is one of the fields where private sector research is huge as well, and to see what they do in the private sector, here is a good start.... http://research.microsoft.com/research/projects/

Sounds a lot like philosophy, in that the subject covers heaps of different areas. I'd be interested to see if a computer could pass the Turing test in my lifetime - I think it would make certain questions about the mind more pressing than they are now.

BTW - there is a mod that provides a 3D UI for OS X (it sucks though). What do you make of the "fuzzy logic" thing that was in vogue some years back?

[KrazyHorse]

The odd thing is how simple most good theories tend to be. The more complicated you make them the more points they have to go wrong on...