Philosophy

Message boards : Science (non-SETI) : Philosophy
Message board moderation

To post messages, you must log in.

1 · 2 · 3 · 4 . . . 8 · Next

AuthorMessage
Profile Chris SCrowdfunding Project Donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 19 Nov 00
Posts: 40071
Credit: 35,096,635
RAC: 65,998
United Kingdom
Message 1704691 - Posted: 24 Jul 2015, 18:05:47 UTC

Did any of you read that link I posted earlier? Trees

It purports to say that nothing exists if it can't be seen or heard. The tree falling in question will obviously make a noise, we know that from observing other trees falling. It is just that there is nobody around to see it or hear it. But it doesn't mean that it didn't make that noise, we just didn't know about it. It therefore didn't exist in our personal knowledge, not that it didn't exist in actuality.

That is the same as saying that I could walk through a forest and not know that thousands of trees had lived and died and rotted away, leaving no trace. What am I supposed to do, leave a plaque saying "In memory of all the trees that may have died. RIP" ? Hundreds may have done, none may have done, I have no way of knowing, but what does it matter to me? It might do in 300 million years when it forms part of a coal seam to prove it existed, and warms my home.

A man can cross a road on a blind bend, because he can't see the car around the corner he can assume that it doesn't exist. When it runs him over he will soon know that it does.

A bus may have driven past my house whilst I was in the back garden, it doesn't exist to me. But if it didn't in real life, the passengers on it might have a long walk. Etc etc.

Who writes all this twaddle, and more worryingly who believes it?
ID: 1704691 · Report as offensive
Profile janneseti
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 14 Oct 09
Posts: 14106
Credit: 655,366
RAC: 1
Sweden
Message 1704699 - Posted: 24 Jul 2015, 19:00:31 UTC - in response to Message 1704691.  
Last modified: 24 Jul 2015, 19:00:52 UTC

Did any of you read that link I posted earlier? Trees

I did.
But haven't scientific ideas always started as philosophy (speculation/hypothes)?
If you cannot observe something does that mean that it doesn't exist?
That means for instance that Big Bang didn't happen, Black hole doesn't exist, the quantum world doesn't exist.
Who belive in thought experiments?
ID: 1704699 · Report as offensive
Profile Chris SCrowdfunding Project Donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 19 Nov 00
Posts: 40071
Credit: 35,096,635
RAC: 65,998
United Kingdom
Message 1704837 - Posted: 25 Jul 2015, 6:33:07 UTC

Philosophy as in speculation or hypotheses, to explain things is one aspect of it but it is the metaphysics bit that I have the most disagreement with.

Metaphysics is the study of the most general features of reality, such as existence, time, the relationship between mind and body, objects and their properties, wholes and their parts, events, processes, and causation.

Metapysics

Added to all this is Zeno's paradoxes, the most famous being Achilles and the tortoise, and Homer and the bus. Zeno It COULD be said that in THEORY Achilles is always some distance away from the tortoise, even if just 1 millionth of an inch, and the same as the bus. But in practical terms, one last flying leap would put him in front of it, or one last hop would put him on it.

This is explained by the dichotomy paradox that concludes that all motion therefore must be just an illusion. Utter tosh.

The three examples that you gave DO exist, we can detect them, we just don't know exactly what they are. This business of the cat and the tree is just woolly thinking, from people that think too much, and has no practical purpose that I can see.
ID: 1704837 · Report as offensive
Nick: ID 666
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 18 May 99
Posts: 11227
Credit: 31,501,956
RAC: 3,579
United Kingdom
Message 1704842 - Posted: 25 Jul 2015, 6:45:18 UTC

ID: 1704842 · Report as offensive
Profile William Rothamel
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 25 Oct 06
Posts: 3335
Credit: 1,322,163
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1704878 - Posted: 25 Jul 2015, 10:09:31 UTC - in response to Message 1704842.  
Last modified: 25 Jul 2015, 10:47:04 UTC

What we are dealing with here may just be semantics and a re-hash of the two-slit experiment.

I seem to recall that the two-slit phenomenon has since been seen in a new light which removes some of the duality conundrum. Does anyone have a reference to this --I can't remember where I saw this a few years ago.

Ah yes do a google on "The double (or two slit) slit experiment revisited" and you will get some good references.

Ah yes light or a photon is a disturbance in the electro-magnetic field. They oscillate in two different planes. The designation is TEM for Transverse Electro Magnetism. They used TEM1 which has a single maximum. Whichever maximum occurs when the particle (wave) hits the two slits will allow it to pass through one or the other.

i used TEM 13 for my masters thesis concerning characteristics of a microwave interferometer.
ID: 1704878 · Report as offensive
Profile Chris SCrowdfunding Project Donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 19 Nov 00
Posts: 40071
Credit: 35,096,635
RAC: 65,998
United Kingdom
Message 1704880 - Posted: 25 Jul 2015, 10:20:43 UTC

I still say philosophy is bunk! If it's good enough for Henry Ford, it's good enough for me!
ID: 1704880 · Report as offensive
Profile janneseti
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 14 Oct 09
Posts: 14106
Credit: 655,366
RAC: 1
Sweden
Message 1704883 - Posted: 25 Jul 2015, 10:44:30 UTC - in response to Message 1704878.  
Last modified: 25 Jul 2015, 10:49:22 UTC

What we are dealing with here may just be semantics and a re-hash of the two-slit experiment.

I seem to recall that the two-slit phenomenon has since been seen in a new light which removes some of the duality conundrum. Does anyone have a reference to this --I can't remember where I saw this a few years ago.

Ah yes do a google on "The double (or two slit) slit experiment revisited" and you will get some good references.

Double Slit Experiment explained Anton Zeilinger.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tZwm9CKE-60

Without philosophy there wouldnt be any science.
ID: 1704883 · Report as offensive
Profile William Rothamel
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 25 Oct 06
Posts: 3335
Credit: 1,322,163
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1704884 - Posted: 25 Jul 2015, 10:59:33 UTC - in response to Message 1704883.  

Yes.

But it is well known that measurements alter the experimental landscape. If you try to measure position and momentum you have disturbed the ability to measure one or the other. This is true at the very small. So the detector in the two slit experiment acts in the same way.

This is misconstrued by some to say reality does not exist. Careful experiments and analysis explain what really happens and therefore preserves the concept of reality.

in other words "Cogito ergo sum" or if you prefer the original "je pense dunc je suis"
ID: 1704884 · Report as offensive
Profile janneseti
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 14 Oct 09
Posts: 14106
Credit: 655,366
RAC: 1
Sweden
Message 1704886 - Posted: 25 Jul 2015, 11:19:57 UTC - in response to Message 1704884.  
Last modified: 25 Jul 2015, 11:23:30 UTC

What is reality? From Through The Wormhole whole episod.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W81N9WHx7MI

Descartes said he exist. I don't Think he said his perceptions are real.
He was both a philophoser and a mathematician.
ID: 1704886 · Report as offensive
Profile Chris
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 20 Jul 15
Posts: 11
Credit: 163,712
RAC: 0
Norway
Message 1704888 - Posted: 25 Jul 2015, 11:57:18 UTC

We don't know what the world is actually like.
For example sight is just how we interpret light that has been reflected off something else.
We know only that this something other changed the light and we call this change colour.
We can never know anything outside of ourself for sure 100%.
Since our main way of learning things are indirect by bouncing light off of it.
We can infer and theorize a lot, but in the end we struggle when the light disrupts the thing we are trying to study.
What we are doing in particle physics is like playing billiard with a blindfold
and trying to infer where all the other balls are from where the white one ended
up after the spread.
Sure we can learn a lot and theorize even more, but at the end of the day we really don't know what is going on.
Reality keeps adding balls to our table and they keep getting smaller,
while out white ball detector stays the same.
Yesterdays liberating insight is todays bullshit and tomorrows jail of stale explaination.
ID: 1704888 · Report as offensive
Umpteenth Snark

Send message
Joined: 2 Oct 13
Posts: 472
Credit: 175,597
RAC: 0
Message 1704898 - Posted: 25 Jul 2015, 12:36:43 UTC - in response to Message 1704880.  

I still say philosophy is bunk!

Why are you wasting your time and infinite wisdom here? Go tell these institutions, that you have solved everything, and they can close down:
http://www.phil.cam.ac.uk
http://www.philosophy.ox.ac.uk
http://www.bbk.ac.uk/philosophy/.
ID: 1704898 · Report as offensive
Profile Gordon Lowe
Volunteer moderator
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 5 Nov 00
Posts: 9817
Credit: 5,175,554
RAC: 2,566
United States
Message 1704901 - Posted: 25 Jul 2015, 12:45:44 UTC

I got A's in most of my philosophy classes in college, but I never really knew what I was talking about. ;~)
The mind is a weird and mysterious place
ID: 1704901 · Report as offensive
Profile Chris
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 20 Jul 15
Posts: 11
Credit: 163,712
RAC: 0
Norway
Message 1704903 - Posted: 25 Jul 2015, 12:48:38 UTC - in response to Message 1704898.  

I still say philosophy is bunk!

Why are you wasting your time and infinite wisdom here? Go tell these institutions, that you have solved everything, and they can close down:
http://www.phil.cam.ac.uk
http://www.philosophy.ox.ac.uk
http://www.bbk.ac.uk/philosophy/.


Yes!
If only the institutions got the right answer then philosophy would be solved.
I'm sorry, but I think that philosophy primarily belong in the private sphere.
To give the impression that an institution can take care of it for us,
well that is probably one of the gravest sins man has done onto man.
It is an encrouchment upon mans most private sphere, namely subjectivity.
Subjectivity is all you really got in the end and you better take good care of it.
Yesterdays liberating insight is todays bullshit and tomorrows jail of stale explaination.
ID: 1704903 · Report as offensive
Profile janneseti
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 14 Oct 09
Posts: 14106
Credit: 655,366
RAC: 1
Sweden
Message 1704907 - Posted: 25 Jul 2015, 13:02:47 UTC

Can you make a living beeing a philosopher?
ID: 1704907 · Report as offensive
Profile Chris
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 20 Jul 15
Posts: 11
Credit: 163,712
RAC: 0
Norway
Message 1704909 - Posted: 25 Jul 2015, 13:10:38 UTC - in response to Message 1704907.  

Can you make a living beeing a philosopher?


If you write a book that hits home with a lot of people.
If you get paid by an institution to regurgitate other peoples views.
If you become a guru that gets taken care of by your followers.
Might be some others I can't think of right away.
Yesterdays liberating insight is todays bullshit and tomorrows jail of stale explaination.
ID: 1704909 · Report as offensive
Profile William Rothamel
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 25 Oct 06
Posts: 3335
Credit: 1,322,163
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1704920 - Posted: 25 Jul 2015, 14:02:12 UTC - in response to Message 1704886.  
Last modified: 25 Jul 2015, 14:02:49 UTC

He was both a philophoser and a mathematician.


A lawyer, soldier and a tutor to the queen of Sweden also.

Died in 1650 ::: perhaps the first true Renaissance man.
ID: 1704920 · Report as offensive
Profile janneseti
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 14 Oct 09
Posts: 14106
Credit: 655,366
RAC: 1
Sweden
Message 1704926 - Posted: 25 Jul 2015, 14:29:52 UTC - in response to Message 1704920.  
Last modified: 25 Jul 2015, 14:33:00 UTC

He was both a philophoser and a mathematician.


A lawyer, soldier and a tutor to the queen of Sweden also.

Died in 1650 ::: perhaps the first true Renaissance man.

The first true Renaissance man was Leonardo da Vinci IMO.
However René Descartes has contributed very much to math.
The integral is an important concept in mathematics. Integration is one of the two main operations in calculus, with its inverse, differentiation, being the other.

Newton only refined it.
In the 17th century, European mathematicians Isaac Barrow, René Descartes, Pierre de Fermat, Blaise Pascal, John Wallis and others discussed the idea of a derivative. In particular, in Methodus ad disquirendam maximam et minima and in De tangentibus linearum curvarum, Fermat developed an adequality method for determining maxima, minima, and tangents to various curves that was closely related to differentiation.[10] Isaac Newton would later write that his own early ideas about calculus came directly from "Fermat's way of drawing tangents.

About Descarte's visit in Sweden.
It didn't turn out so well...
In a letter dated 15 January 1650, Descartes expresses reservations about his decision to come to Sweden. He sees himself to be “out of his element,” the winter so harsh that “men's thoughts are frozen here, like the water”. Given the sentiment expressed in the letter, this remark was probably intended to be as much Descartes's take on the intellectual climate as it was about the weather. In early February, less than a month after writing Bregy, Descartes fell ill. His illness quickly turned into a serious respiratory infection. And, although at the end of a week he appeared to have made some movement towards recovery, things took a turn for the worse and he died in the early morning of 11 February 1650.
ID: 1704926 · Report as offensive
Profile William Rothamel
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 25 Oct 06
Posts: 3335
Credit: 1,322,163
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1705001 - Posted: 25 Jul 2015, 19:13:58 UTC - in response to Message 1704926.  

Some suggest he met with foul play. Perhaps he got too close to the Queen of Sweden.
ID: 1705001 · Report as offensive
Profile janneseti
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 14 Oct 09
Posts: 14106
Credit: 655,366
RAC: 1
Sweden
Message 1705014 - Posted: 25 Jul 2015, 20:10:39 UTC - in response to Message 1705001.  

Some suggest he met with foul play. Perhaps he got too close to the Queen of Sweden.

I don't know about foul play, but Queen Kristina liked to hang out with scientists and philosophers.
Some suggest she was a hermaphrodite.
ID: 1705014 · Report as offensive
Profile Chris SCrowdfunding Project Donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 19 Nov 00
Posts: 40071
Credit: 35,096,635
RAC: 65,998
United Kingdom
Message 1705168 - Posted: 26 Jul 2015, 8:05:59 UTC

Some of the most prominent philosophers of the 20th and 21st centuries are Bertrand Russell, Ludwig Wittgenstein, Jean-Paul Sartre, Claude Levi-Strauss, Albert Camus, Richard Rorty, Noam Chomsky and Slavoj Žižek.

It just seems to me that all that philosophers do, is to make clever quips which nobody else understands.

Sartre
ID: 1705168 · Report as offensive
1 · 2 · 3 · 4 . . . 8 · Next

Message boards : Science (non-SETI) : Philosophy


 
©2017 University of California
 
SETI@home and Astropulse are funded by grants from the National Science Foundation, NASA, and donations from SETI@home volunteers. AstroPulse is funded in part by the NSF through grant AST-0307956.