Is Philosophy Viewed as Lesser in Scientific Forums?

[Gokul43201]

On PF? You do original research on PF?

Nobody "does" original research on an internet forum. I don't even see how that is logically possible.

You "do" original reasearch in your lab (where you have your equipment) or in your office (where your notebooks, refernce material and computers are), or adopting a more liberal interpretation of that sentence, you do research in your head.

So, are you telling us that philosophers do original research on PF?

 

[Smurf]

So, are you telling us that philosophers do original research on PF?

Yeah kinda, that was my point. People go onto the philosophy forum and are like "Hmm, I'm a moral subjectivist (or whatever) and am going to prove I'm right to everyone with a clever analogy I came up with just now". Crackpottery ensues. Then the universe turns to Philosophy forum and says "Your reputation just decreased 2 points".

Like I said before. People ask questions in the Math forum. People try to prove they know all the answers in the philosophy forums.

If people went onto the philosophy forums and said "I often hear people say Nietszche's famous "God is dead" quote as if it's a big affront to christianity. But to me I interpreted it more as zarathustra proclaiming that the belief in god was dead rather than the actual personification. blah blah blah" then instead the universe would turn to Philosophy forum and say "Your reputation just increased 1 point" instead of the first one.

 

[loseyourname]

So, are you telling us that philosophers do original research on PF?

I still don't think he's articulating it very well, but philosophical research (aside from scholasticism) is a process of reasoned discourse, meaning that an internet forum is an appropriate medium through which to conduct such research. Scientific research, on the other hand, is experimental in nature and cannot really be conducted online by talking to other people. You can talk about your research, but that is not actually research. You can't do science online, but you can do philosophy online.

There are examples of members here that advance philosophical systems and hypotheses using this forum, some (like Les Sleeth, for example) that are very well thought-out and articulated, and that even result from personal empirical research (autophenomenological, but still empirical in the broadest sense). One may or may not feel this is a worthwhile pursuit, or may even think that these members are full of it, but the point is that it can be done. This is an appropriate medium through which to do philosophy.

The only problem I personally have is that people seem to think you don't need a philosophy education or philosophical training to do this well. So even though this may be a legit medium, we end up largely with what would be the equivalent of a 4th grade science fair. That's fine, but the members don't seem to always realize this. The point of a science fair is education, training, but it seems that many people come here to pound a personal philosophical idea into everyone else's head, rather than to hone their philosophy skills.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

There's a distinct difference between a universe that's unpredictable and one with mysteries. Drifting through a region of space with "something" in it does not, in of itself, pose any philosophical quandaries for science.

I did a really poor job of trying to make my point [working long hours and not thinking well anymore]. I guess what I was trying to say was that we don't know that everything that affects our measurements can itself be part of a grand theory. For example, and this is not a theory or suggestion but only an example taken from the aether... Say for example that at the deepest level, mathematics is somehow fundamentally inconsistent with physical reality. Maybe that would be a better way to imagine the sort of paradox that I have in mind.

As for the rest, we really got off track. What I originally said was this:

Considering that we don't have a unified theory, isn't it ultimately a faith statement that physics is not a philosophy?

Must everything you do rest on faith that it will work out in your favor? Even if Einstein believed that he could find the final theory, he didn't necessarily have religious faith in the workings of science. Perhaps he did, I'm not familiar enough with the man to speak for him, but I know that I don't and I know that many of my colleagues don't.

Is physics a philosophy? In the end, mathematics is based on assumptions. Isn't math, hence physics a philosophy based on assumptions and defintions. I have always understood [perhaps assumed] that a grand theory would be evidence of our most basic assumptions.

 

[Pythagorean]

philo - sophy
to love - wisdom

I really think it boils down to the fact that this is an internet forum. Somebody used the math forums to compare, but I don't think it's a fair comparison, because untrained people hardly ever try to come up with crackpot math theories.

Physics and philosophy, on the other hand, leave room for a lot of creative visualization, so on an internet forum (where any joe can walk in and say something) it's no surprise that there's a lot of 'reaching' by the untrained, and (in most cases) the never-planning-to-train.

Other than that, I think both professional philosophers and physicists are just as prone to making the same foolish assertions as they are to discovering some sort of bridge between reality and consciousness.

I just think it's ironic how many scientists confuse their models of reality with reality itself, then point fingers at the philosophers for making the same mistake. To me, physics is no closer to 'reality' than mysticism; science is just the view that I personally like to superimpose over my picture of reality.

edit: Additionally, as mentioned before, and as the great Fang Lizhi (a Chinese Physicist, who had philosophies imposed on him from his government) once said, math and philosophy are merely tools of physics, neither should be held too high nor given too much neglect.

 

[Evo]

The internet really has given a bad name to philosophy. The number of airheads that think any flaky idea that popped into their head after having a few too many beers is of profound philosophical merit is mind boggling, and unfortunately the internet gives them a place to share.

 

[AO eye 5]

I also agree with the "black sheep" representation to philosophy unforunately.
Personally, I am waiting for some quality discussion in this PF division which is inclusive,(I am not a philosopher, and have not taken a course) interesting, important and not too "esoteric."