US universities/colleges still suck

[Agathon]

You know....
I think Agathon is really Asher's DL and he gets his jollies by arguing with himself on Poly....

Nope.

I draw the line at Rob Thomas.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Oncle Boris
You forget that even "poor" Athenian citizens owned a few slaves each.

Did I say Athens? And frankly, having slaves doesn't make up for the fact that you'd be living in ancient times. Hell, I'd rather live as I do right now than be a European monarch of the 1800s.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by GePap
The notion that truth can be achieved through empirical observation and experimentation, the very point of science, is a philosophical notion. All science is a subset of philosophy. Hence why you get a Doctorate of Philosophy in any of the Sciences.

Only if you use an incredibly broad definition of philosophy that makes the entire debate meaningless, as you've basically called ALL search for knowledge philosophy.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Agathon

Or maybe you'd be more appreciative of the treatments that are given to you to save your life/ease your pain that were done via computer simulations and research.

I certainly was when my father was dying, but that's not enough and it never will be.

Like hell. You don't know anything about biology either, do you?

[Ben Kenobi]

Asher:

Have you taken them either?

From what I saw, there was very little time spent on theory, and plenty on following a set of instructions.

I find it very hard to debug when I don't understand what the program is trying to do.

Granted, given time, I probably would have, but the class was not geared to give people that time. Rather they assumed a familiarity with coding that I didn't have and went from there.

[Agathon]

Like hell. You don't know anything about biology either, do you?

And from that comment you obviously know nothing about the death of loved ones you stupid kid.

[Kuciwalker]

What's that got to do with whether or not CS-aided biology will help cure these diseases?

[Agathon]

What's that got to do with whether or not CS-aided biology will help cure these diseases?

Right now it can't and it's unlikely that there will ever be a cure all for death, hence people with real problems might need something else. So you comment was predictably immature and stupid.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by GePap
The notion that truth can be achieved through empirical observation and experimentation, the very point of science, is a philosophical notion. All science is a subset of philosophy.

Not quite. While we can assert that science is founded on the basis of naturalism, science itself is not philosophy.

Originally posted by GePap
Hence why you get a Doctorate of Philosophy in any of the Sciences.

Or any discipline, for that matter.

Sometimes people get a Doctorate of Science if they work hard enough in related fields, though.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Lul Thyme
If you really want to have him up the a*s, then wait until he's bending down, he does it enough.
Right now you're just humping a tree.

Best post of the thread

[aneeshm]

My two questions still remain unanswered . Is there no philosopher capable of answering them ?

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Asher
Why is this thread even mentioning philosophy anyway? Would the insecure Philosophers please start a different thread to defend their usefulness so we can go back to discussing the ACM competition?

Maybe because of this?

Originally posted by Asher
Computer Science is a rigourous academic subject, ones that Philosophers have been failing out of for decades.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Our level of technology probably would not have been achieved without capitalist theory which greatly accelerated technological advancement.

Don't forget the principal reason why we are so advanced isn't because of capitalism, but because of the humanism combined with the idea of progress that kicked in during the renaissance in Europe.

Europe was an innovative continent way before capitalism, while a great many societies remained completely stagnant (a variety of aboriginal societies, but also many post-prehistoric societies that saw no point in technological progress)

[Kuciwalker]

And you could make a strong argument that this is due to environmental factors and was not dependent on the presense of a bunch of philosophers.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by St Leo
There is no inherent purpose in life. The individual can pick any purpose they like and adopt it as theirs.

This idea took off only a few decades ago, after fashionable philosophers developed and endorsed it. It's now nearly obvious to our generation.

I think the philosophers have been quite successful at giving this meaning of life. Among others.