Philosophy (Part 2)

[Ramo]

Philosophy is not mathematics, it's not an exact science at all. Thus it's not surprising that the methods of reasoning are different.

Actually, philosophy is mathematics. It's just that a lot of philosophy is logically crap.

[DuncanK]

frogger,

Pregnancy is not an illness. A person should not have to have a medical proceedure to absolve someone else of their financial obligations. If that person has an illness, that's different.

[The Vagabond]

Originally posted by Frogger
So a philosophy that says the Earth is the centre of the Universe has been disproven? Congratulations. I don't know about you, but in my mind this proves the utility of science, not philosophy.

In order to be progressing philosophy would have to correct itself.

Philosophy relies on science, and its ability to correct itself while remaining within itself is quite limited.

And it's not surprising that it ends up being futile when the concepts you deal with are so difficult to define that every argument boils down to one of definition.

Mathematically precise definitions are impossible in philosophy. It's a different science after all. Yes, a lot of discussion in philosophy revolves around definitions (or better to say concepts).

Not in circles! Each time the circle repeats itself on a higher level. Thus it's a spiral. This is the third law of dialectics (Gegel).

Only true if you can show that philosophy has debunked some of its own thoeries in such a way that they can't rise again in their exact previous form were fashions to change.

That they can't arise again in their exact previous form we should thank first of all science.

**********************
OK, in essence, my answer to all your remarks is "And so what?"

[The Vagabond]

Originally posted by Ramo
Actually, philosophy is mathematics.

How so?

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by DuncanK
frogger,

Pregnancy is not an illness. A person should not have to have a medical proceedure to absolve someone else of their financial obligations. If that person has an illness, that's different.

A scar is an illness? It's called cosmetic surgery for a reason.

[DuncanK]

Originally posted by Frogger


A scar is an illness? It's called cosmetic surgery for a reason.

You shouldn't force someone to have that surgery either, but I don't think that you should have to pay for all of her future wages either. There should be some other payment if she decided against the surgery. There's a big difference between someone not wanting to have cosmetic surgery and someone not wanting to have an abortion, because they don't believe in it.

[Ramo]

How so?

Math is building a system from a set of assumptions based on the logical rule of the invalidity of contradiction. So is philosophy. Philosophical assumptions are not substantially different from mathematical ones. It's just that a lot of philosophy ends up being logically dubious while math usually is very rigorous in maintaing logical validity.

[DuncanK]

frogger,

A pregnant women should have the right to have her child. You can't take away her right to be a parent. That being said, the father has a responsibility to his child the same as the mother. People should not have to take on someone elses responsibility just because they don't want to give up their rights.

[DuncanK]

Ramo,

How is math based on assumptions?

edit: can you explain invalidity of contradiction?

[Jon Miller]

Originally posted by DuncanK
frogger,

A pregnant women should have the right to have her child. You can't take away her right to be a parent. That being said, the father has a responsibility to his child the same as the mother. People should not have to take on someone elses responsibility just because they don't want to give up their rights.

I would say that the government should be responsible (as well as her family)

this indirectly puts the father as responisble (he is paying taxes)

bu tnot directly

Jon Miller

[CyberGnu]

Agathon:

if we really want to know why a certain scientific theory is right we have to look at the reasons why and the reasons for that, and the reasons for that and so on. In the end you end up asking philosophical questions about the nature of knowledge. In other words, questions about realism and anti realism, about reduction, scepticism, holism, supervenience, concepts, representationalism and emergence.

Nope. Reality exists, that is all we need to know.

If you feel the need to question it, feel free to do so. Just don't pretend it has any meaning or intrinsic worth.

Perhaps you don't, you certainly don't need to to engage in the practical business of science, but people who are interested in knowledge for its own sake do, including our friend Albert Einstein who remarked, "science without epistemology is - insofar as it is thinkable at all - primitive and muddled" although he did warn us about the practical consequences of scientists focusing too much on epistemology.

Ahh, you certainly do know how to pick them. Should I engage in the favorite pasttime of Plato: to lead you on with questions to expose your lack of knowledge?

Nah, would take too long.

Basically, Einstein was a physicist, and later in life a philosopher. His career as a physicist also effectively ended at the same point. Was this a coincidence? I don't know. Even if there was a cause and efect, in what direction would it go? Did his preoccupation with the useless prevent him from pondering anything of value, or did he lose the inspiration for things of value and thus turned to the useless? We will never know.

But I suppose that you lot are just so much brighter than he was. He must have been a really lousy scientist to have been so wrong.

Ahhh, more sarcasm from someone who don't know what they are talking about. Beautiful.

[DuncanK]

Originally posted by Jon Miller


I would say that the government should be responsible (as well as her family)

this indirectly puts the father as responisble (he is paying taxes)

bu tnot directly

Jon Miller

Jon Miller,

Why should everyone be equally responsible. The parents are the ones who had the sex. I agree that society should be responsible to provide for the needs of people who can't provide for their own needs, but the father should be the one to pay if he can. It's in the best interest of the child, and it's in the best interest of society for parents to be responsible for their children when they can.

[Jon Miller]

well if the father had to pay more, tha father would need more, and so receive more

I don't see why the process has to go through so many steps, when just one is needed



Jon Miller

[CyberGnu]

You can add to this that science can't really tell us anything at all about value, which happens to be the most important thing in life (trying thinking of what living life would be like if you ignored the notion of value). That's why we snobby philosophers let you science peasants do the donkey work and invent "nice" things while we bother with stuff that matters.

So if you think scientific results are so great, what do they tell us about the notion of value? What political system do they offer support for?

Are you high? Why would science answer those questions? These are questions each and every human will have to answer for himself.

Of course the usual response of the science loving philistine is to deny any objective notion of value, usually without an argument or a really lame one like Asher's "everyone has their own morals, so there must be no moral knowledge" which is a bluntly fallacious inference. But essentially it is a philosophical question anyway.

Possibly, but not something a selfproclaimed "thinker" will settle for me.

You just don't get that part, do you? It doesn't matter what you or 500 other philosophers deduce about "value". If you decide opera is the highest form of enjoyment, I still won't like it. If you decide "helping others" is the highest calling, I will still go out for beers on friday night.

[KrazyHorse]

A pregnant women should have the right to have her child

Who's stopping her? She also has the responsibility to pay for it should she choose to have it. You're arguing that women should be able to have their cake and eat it too.