Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 10:02:27 UTC No. 16226531

>>16226485
>WE ARE DOING IMPORTANT SHIT JUST AS MUCH AS YOU DO,

Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 10:14:04 UTC No. 16226538

>>16226485
>pondering about life and stuff?
That is what philosophers do though
There seems to be an issue with definitions and too many things lumped together:
>i analyze language
linguistics is a science
>do research on philosophical things
>do research
what does this mean? do you study the history of philosophy? If so, you are a historian. However if you ponder
>about life and stuff
as said above, that is philosophy
>logical analysis
logic is both philosophy and mathematics
>and analyze languages
linguistic again

Don't be embarrassed, they were just being more specific, nothing wrong with that, it wasn't a personal attack, I doubt it. You were not wrong, but neither were they.
cheer up

Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 11:04:14 UTC No. 16226587

>>16226485
The only respect you'll get as a philosopher is if you do formal logic.

B00T at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 11:05:56 UTC No. 16226592

>>16226587
I haven't done anything wong.

B00T at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 11:08:22 UTC No. 16226594

You're not getting your jibby because then I'd be weak to my cause. I told you. Now leave me be.

Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 11:09:40 UTC No. 16226599

>>16226592
True. But formal logic forms the basis of computing science, so it's a bit more well known among non-philosophers.

Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 11:09:52 UTC No. 16226600

>>16226485
"Analytic philosophy" is a cringe LARP. They want to pretend being logical while being too low IQ to realize that they are abusing formal logic outside of its intended scope (math). You may impress reddit teens with this but any mathematically educated person sees right through your bullshit.

Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 11:12:09 UTC No. 16226606

>>16226600
To be fair to philosophers, philosophy majors have highest IQs alongside mathematics and physics majors, so that part is not true.

Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 11:12:59 UTC No. 16226608

>>16226485
I’m jealous, it sounds like it would be cool to hang out with you. I did a math PhD but I always liked reading analytic philosophy on the side. I used to read Searle quite a bit, too bad he turned out to be a creeper.

B00T at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 11:14:27 UTC No. 16226610

>>16226608
I'll contact you soon regarding the mode. This has to be contractual.

Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 11:15:48 UTC No. 16226612

>>16226606
>alongside mathematics and physics majors
Nice try physics majors, don’t you dare glom in to us math majors and philosophy majors. Go nuke some more innocent people while you’re at it, we’ll be here modeling your behavior and analyzing your power structure until we find the Jenga piece that will make your Jewish power structure come crumbling down

Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 11:24:47 UTC No. 16226619

>>16226612
I'm sorry but it is based on empirical principles, which I'm sure mathematics majors aren't very familiar with.

Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 11:46:06 UTC No. 16226635

>>16226485
Philosophy is important anon, continue doing philosophy.

Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 12:02:18 UTC No. 16226645

>>16226485
To be fair, you have to have a very high IQ to understand the intricacies of major philosophical movements. The nuances are extremely subtle, and without a solid grasp of foundational theories, most of the concepts will go over a typical reader's head. There's also the existential undertone in many philosophical texts, deftly woven into their arguments — for instance, existentialism draws heavily from the works of Kierkegaard and Nietzsche. True aficionados comprehend this material; they have the intellectual capacity to truly appreciate the depths of these theories, realizing that they aren't just abstract ideas — they say something profound about LIFE. As a consequence, people who dismiss philosophy as impractical truly ARE misguided — of course, they wouldn't appreciate, for instance, the existential humor in Sartre's famous line "Hell is other people," which itself is a cryptic commentary on human interactions and societal structures. I'm smirking right now just imagining one of those uninitiated individuals scratching their heads in confusion as the brilliance of philosophical discourse unfolds before them. What fools... how I pity them.
And yes, by the way, I DO have a collection of philosophy books. And no, you cannot borrow them. They're for those who can demonstrate an understanding of the similar number of philosophers as me.

Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 13:26:47 UTC No. 16226754

>>16226600
>>16226606
I have encountered so many analytical philosophers like this. Not saying all of them, but there are plenty.

Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 16:51:44 UTC No. 16227019

>>16226538
So philosophy specifically refers to things that do not have actual logical answers?

Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 10:00:11 UTC No. 16228180

>>16226619
LMAOOOO
>MOGGED
>O
>G
>G
>E
>D
>>16226531
fuck off

Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 10:01:14 UTC No. 16228182

>>16226600
nice try, continental philosopher
>>16226754
>Not saying all of them, but there are plenty.
where???

Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 10:02:36 UTC No. 16228186

>>16226608
>I’m jealous, it sounds like it would be cool to hang out with you.
eyy, that's more like it. how can i contact you? you know, for conversation and stuff

Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 10:05:14 UTC No. 16228191

>>16226538
>linguistics is a science
i'm sorry to say this but language analysis is something analytic philosophers do too. it's called "philosophy of language" and it's a branch of the analytic movement. you should go read it more

also, linguistics isn't a science, it's a humanities discipline

Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 11:55:59 UTC No. 16228252

>>16226608
>too bad he turned out to be a creeper

Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 12:04:57 UTC No. 16228265

>>16226485
Analytic philosophy is so fucking cucked lmfao. You guys can’t decide if you want to be peer-reviewed scientists or philosophers and get appropriately ridiculed by serious members of either group.

You ruined everything good about philosophy. This is your punishment.

Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 12:15:29 UTC No. 16228280

>>16226485
>analyze languages
How does that not make you a linguist (or philologist, but you obviously didn't mean in the cultural way)?
If you are truly a philosopher, you should known actual philosophy detests if some concept is tied to a certain token, and could not instead be replaced by a referent variable which may or may not carry name(s).
E.g. just recently I had a discussion with a tard who insisted all ethics is actually consequentialist. So I just told him "cool bro, so the word is meaningless if it can't be used to create a distinction from other (meta)ethical frameworks. So I'll just call it "superconsequentalism". I could also call it "clownism". It doesn't matter. The concept, the idea, the mechanism behind something does."

If you analyze language, how do you account for that? You do not actually study language if you never need to include research on tokens.

Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 12:33:38 UTC No. 16228300

>>16226485
They sound based. Analytic philosophy is trying to do things with scientific and mathematical rigour while dealing with concepts from humanities that have no rigour whatsoever. That's why science and math progress while philosophy is in the state of constant "discussions" about hundreds years old topics. At least continental philosophers, with all their shortcomings, don't pretend they are doing science, but they actually provide grand commentary about society, values and art, which is continuos with other humanities disciplnes. And that''s the way philosophy should be. After all people associate philosophy with figures like Nietzsche, Sartre or Heidegger, not with Quine, Putnam or Kripke. Analytic philosphers like you dickride stem related fields, but it'll never be the other way around. This onesidedness is kinda pathetic.
t. studied philosophy and math

Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 12:42:14 UTC No. 16228307

You cannot know nuffin

Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 12:49:20 UTC No. 16228315

>>16226485
What exactly do analytic philosophers in your field do? Can you point to some examples that would enlighten me so that I can come to understand why it should be taken seriously?

Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 13:04:35 UTC No. 16228340

>>16226538
unfortunately not many philosophers nowadays ponder about "life and stuff". It was done in Ancient Greece and Rome and the most popular philosophical ideas that are actually relevant today like stoicism emrge from that era. That's what get people interested in philosophy - how to live your life and be happy and find a meaning. And if modern philosophy tackles such themes, it's also influential and popular (like existentialism). But since academic philosophy now is mostly analytic, we get wannabe stem austists like OP who are too dumb to do proper science and that's why nobody cares about philosophy or what contemporary philosopers do. This split between what most people (including scientists) think philosophy is and what actual philosophers nowadays do is so huge I find it both amusing and sad.

Anonymous at Wed, 12 Jun 2024 00:56:31 UTC No. 16229495

>>16228186
Easiest way to contact me is to challenge me to a chess match on lichess dot org. My username is “literal-nobody”

Anonymous at Wed, 12 Jun 2024 01:07:01 UTC No. 16229511

>>16229495
I forgot to mention, challenge me to a correspondence game

Anonymous at Wed, 12 Jun 2024 01:13:58 UTC No. 16229524

>>16226485
>like a scientist who tries way too hard to look cool
Do you really perceive the world in terms of coolness? What's the coolest math?

Anonymous at Wed, 12 Jun 2024 01:25:45 UTC No. 16229551

>>16228265
>You ruined everything good about philosophy.
>You guys can’t decide if you want to be peer-reviewed scientists or philosophers and get appropriately ridiculed by serious members of either group.
lmfao, what do you know about analytic philosophy anyways? dumb loser like you couldn't comprehend the complexities and beauty of analytic philosophy
>>16228280
uhm, hello? philosophy of language is a thing, you know?

Anonymous at Wed, 12 Jun 2024 01:30:32 UTC No. 16229560

>>16228300
that's an interesting insight... tell me more about your experience with analytic philosophy and what you know about it. and also, tell me how philosophy should be in this day and age
>>16228315
we pretty much do what scientists do, doing research and all of that. we focus on humanities (i.e art, literature, language, etc) rather than the sciences

Anonymous at Wed, 12 Jun 2024 01:32:18 UTC No. 16229564

>>16228340
that begs the question, how do we unite analytic and continental philosophy together?

Anonymous at Wed, 12 Jun 2024 02:10:37 UTC No. 16229603

>>16226606
>>16226619
Philosophy majors' IQ is hard carried by the verbal/language component of tests. Without it, they're midwits at best. They're practically glorified English majors, but with reasoning ability slightly above other English majors.

Anonymous at Wed, 12 Jun 2024 02:18:01 UTC No. 16229610

>>16229603
Where is climate science?

Anonymous at Wed, 12 Jun 2024 02:21:10 UTC No. 16229614

>>16226485
if this is honest then i feel for you bro and would need to recommend you choose to not care what others decide about you thata's none of your business i've heard so if you can't ignore it i'd say do your best to avoid thinking about it until you genearlly don't or the thoughts are weak and don't bother you. If thsi is dishonest i'd say nice show for us of affected and unreal emotion. It got your point across enough i was worried about making sure you at least get that you have an option to not care about things that seem like only harmful to hold. Good job i suspect it's just fake emotions so people like me want to reply. A guy who writes as well as you seems like someone who knows at least this much by now - do not bother with what others say at worst accept it agree with it. Say i am this or that and say that is still fine. Or better i'd prefer if you don't have actual feelings like this that you don't give others a reason to harbor real concern over your theatric post-pizzazz reasons. It's not only lying it's not needed. You are more believable if you are just like. There are people who think this. It dont bother me iam old enough to know how ot disregard unhelpful stuff that i didn't come up with BUT i would like some takes on these dudes thinking i'm something i'm not or whatever. You seem fine honestly and i have a quiet knowing that not only will my post be ignored. The best i could (foolishly - foolish to hope when you already hve what's present) so i won't thope but if iwas a basic boy enough to not know to abandon hope always i would expect especially from the original author would be you pretending again. Most likely in a stupor. People are almost all in a stupor to a greater or lesser degree. And if you do something silly like meditate you might start to come out of it and find it painful but ok to see so many pretendings happening because someone is not lost in the noise of jupiters static energy they call thoughts to see what any of us is

Anonymous at Wed, 12 Jun 2024 02:32:43 UTC No. 16229632

>>16229610
It's part of "Earth Science."

Anonymous at Wed, 12 Jun 2024 02:34:38 UTC No. 16229634

>>16226645
i can't read more but i do have an ask would you please pretty please be kind enough to bless me witha concrete and easily visible _subtlety_ that is helpful to show me what sorts of levels of subtle you are talking about. If you could show me a basic one ican be like whoa harder ones would be way more subtle even. I am so not fine if you don't but i feel a strange to me social need to say i am confident no example will happen and the futility of me lending the info that it would help a lot of things and i knew not just for me to see an example so long as it's graspable yet representatively subtle.

a reddit spacing side not about this. I have a likely cynical or hurt part of me that figures most of philosophy is just saying simple things in a difficult or obtuse way that isn't very helpful and at the same time im sure you are definitely going to find tons of subtly in a science basic on word games as far as i know it getting as formal as they can without being math that is THOUGHT. And honstly my hot take thoguths are mostly bullshit especially the well conceived systemetic logical ones that require a bunch of words that likely obscure the simple broadly for the sake of a truth not worth the squeeze. I'm just cynical because my heart and shit see only a dick would mention something as unimportant as what his heart is. And i know thata you know i mention it only because im sad and i want a random person who it is impossible to in good faith expect them to care. My heart is worthless even to me. But damn it i want you to know i'm pretty sad. And i waste yoru time more by letting you know broken hearts may hurt but at least they rest in the simplicity of permanent ruin that lets you accept being about anything because you know just how much everyone is so much more high than me it just makes me feel safer to be unknown and mattering little. Being a low person is kind of comfy and sad.

Anonymous at Wed, 12 Jun 2024 02:38:10 UTC No. 16229645

>>16226485
they don't have enough range in their knowledge. they know a lot about physics and math. and that's it.
by the way, I respect philosophers a lot, especially the ones who are interested in science.

Anonymous at Wed, 12 Jun 2024 02:41:54 UTC No. 16229647

>>16229524
this point makaes me happy because it makes me examin coolness.
my first reaction is coolness must not be real then! nothing is cool or uncool. Then further it occured to me yes there is cool but only locally. Some or one person perhaps even all in some select window of people will find things cool or uncool. So cool exists. And i don't think cool is just a subjective thing. Cool could be something that generally speaking concious beings when they discover something find it surprising and possibility expanding that in the omment of discovery is so cool because wow that changes my picture of things. Also you have preferences which are there. So cool means i prefer this, or i find it surprising and usefully expanding to hold in my mind.
>t. coolness is a very valid waay to view things just not as a universal, coolness is preferences mostly so universal cool things? Those are just sections of knowledge that general manifest to conciousness even perhaps non human if we could measure it as horizon expanding to experience or know

Anonymous at Wed, 12 Jun 2024 03:21:20 UTC No. 16229687

>>16229603
Economics keeping up with the big boys.

Anonymous at Wed, 12 Jun 2024 03:25:34 UTC No. 16229689

>>16229560
> we pretty much do what scientists do, doing research and all of that. we focus on humanities (i.e art, literature, language, etc) rather than the sciences.

This might sound somewhat strange to you, but I haven a pretty hard time conceptualizing what this could possibly mean in a practical sense. I actually quite like reading philosophy and have read a decent amount of the "classical canon" and a few of the key modernist/post-modernist thinkers, but I can't imagine "philosophical research" as a concept. It seems like in the best case it is either some mixture of creative writing and formal logic, and often is little more than literature but with some "deeper meaning" handwaving to indicate that confusing areas are actually just esoteric rather than unintelligible.

This is why I asked if there were introductory examples you could point to so that I could see what kind of resale you are referring to. I'm willing to believe I misunderstand the process, but I'd like examples of analytic philosophical research to see for myself where I'm going wrong.

Anonymous at Wed, 12 Jun 2024 03:40:36 UTC No. 16229713

>>16229647
That is just an Wittgensteinian language game so your point is invalid and your entire field is pointless.

Anonymous at Wed, 12 Jun 2024 03:52:32 UTC No. 16229739

>>16226485
>shit that never happened
cringe

Anonymous at Wed, 12 Jun 2024 05:22:34 UTC No. 16229836

>>16226485
most philosophers i know are useless brainlets but there might be a few among them who are actually doing useful work. what's your opinion of AI and how it affects language?

Anonymous at Wed, 12 Jun 2024 07:51:53 UTC No. 16229938

>>16229560
that's bullshit though. continental philosophy focuses on art and literature, analytic core from the very beginning is philosophy of language, science, mind and math. I think you're larping as a philosopher here. Nice bait.

Anonymous at Wed, 12 Jun 2024 07:59:16 UTC No. 16229948

>>16229564
we don't. the whole analytic tradition projct in a strict sense (works of Russell, early Wittgenstein, Vienna Circle) failed miserably so there's nothing to unite. there's gradually more and more overlap with "continental themes" (such as interest in history, metaphysics, social sciences, humanities, art) and in a few decades there will be no split anymore. The only thing that is different now is probably the canon (e.g. current analytic philosophers won't quote Derrida or Foucault in their papers because they didn't study their stuff and continentals won't quote Frege and Ayer for the same reason).

Anonymous at Wed, 12 Jun 2024 11:49:47 UTC No. 16230151

>>16229836
Not OP, but this image misunderstands on a fundamental level how a perceptron works (though the way they do function doesn't imply thinking either).

The MLP/NN functions as a continuous/smooth transformation from R^n to R^m (where the input dimension is n and the output dimension is n), not as a discrete lookup table/search. There is no memory in a transformer scheme and there is no searching involved in the actual function itself. While you could argue that floats on a real computer have finite precision length (and thus the set of their possible outputs is at most countable), the computer is discretizing an absolutely continuous functional mapping and thus will not have a consistent "set" of values aside from quantized samples in the continuous image of the function.

Anonymous at Wed, 12 Jun 2024 22:24:00 UTC No. 16231093

bump

Anonymous at Thu, 13 Jun 2024 04:44:53 UTC No. 16231790

>>16229836
>what's your opinion of AI and how it affects language?
it has potential. newest fields in philosophy right now are philosophy of AI which combines philosophy of mind and philosophy of computer science and AI ethics which is one of the many branches of applied ethics

Anonymous at Thu, 13 Jun 2024 04:47:07 UTC No. 16231794

to whoever thinks science can be philosophy-free

Anonymous at Thu, 13 Jun 2024 04:53:47 UTC No. 16231806

Philosophy turned into science once scientific methods and mathematical models were developed. So philosophy is now useless redundant.

Anonymous at Thu, 13 Jun 2024 05:49:38 UTC No. 16231882

>>16231794
>muh underlying philosophical assumptions
Which ones is he talking about? Reality exists? Logic works? Lmao, how much of a pseud midwit do you want to be?

Anonymous at Thu, 13 Jun 2024 13:04:44 UTC No. 16232459

>>16231882
never before have i ever seen such a fallacious argument

Anonymous at Thu, 13 Jun 2024 13:05:52 UTC No. 16232461

>>16231806
>So philosophy is now useless redundant.
okay retard, then explain why we need ethics in science and other philosophical things in science like the "many worlds interpretation" and "quantum suicide" in theoretical physics

Anonymous at Thu, 13 Jun 2024 13:30:41 UTC No. 16232504

>>16232461
Many worlds interpretation is just a variation of the multiverse theory for philosophy grads who want to publish a paper.

Theoretical physics is a useless shitty paper mill and quantum suicide is a shitty gibberish pseudoscience even by theoretical physics standards.

Anonymous at Thu, 13 Jun 2024 13:46:03 UTC No. 16232524

>>16232459
that's a philosophist™ for you

Anonymous at Thu, 13 Jun 2024 13:48:19 UTC No. 16232528

>>16231794
>dennett
didn't read the quote. don't care. he's a pseud

Anonymous at Fri, 14 Jun 2024 01:16:13 UTC No. 16233651

>>16232504
>Theoretical physics is a useless shitty paper mill and quantum suicide is a shitty gibberish pseudoscience even by theoretical physics standards.
>Many worlds interpretation is just a variation of the multiverse theory for philosophy grads who want to publish a paper.
it's not even bait at this point

🗑️ Anonymous at Fri, 14 Jun 2024 01:17:32 UTC No. 16233653

>>16232524
nigger, this >>16231882 nut bag isn't a philosopher. try again

Anonymous at Fri, 14 Jun 2024 01:27:36 UTC No. 16233672

>>16232528
>having an intellect this retarded

Anonymous at Fri, 14 Jun 2024 01:57:25 UTC No. 16233710

>>16226485
Philosophy is tied too much to the humanities to ever really be anything else. Analytic philosophy is memery.

Pretty much, if your field is such that there's still an emphasis on original texts, reading the original writings (even if translated), a weird cult of personality around figures and their writings (not in a historical sense either), etc. you're never going to be truly analytical.

Like, honestly, not to jest, how many Physicists do you know who have read Newton's Principia Mathematica or Maxwell's original papers? How many mathematicians do you know who have read Euler or Euclid? I mean there are occasional ones and some may read a paper here or there, but like, the larger STEM field emphasizes ACTUAL synthesis of knowledge. Even with greats appearing.

Like give me an analytic philosophy text to read and don't give me an original author, if so I'm going to laugh at you.

Anonymous at Fri, 14 Jun 2024 03:29:21 UTC No. 16233816

>>16233653
Shut up, retard. I'm a scientist and hence a natural philosopher.

Anonymous at Fri, 14 Jun 2024 03:44:58 UTC No. 16233831

>>16233710
>Like give me an analytic philosophy text to read and don't give me an original author
https://www.amazon.com/Philosophical-Investigations-Ludwig-Wittgenstein/dp/0631205691
https://www.gutenberg.org/files/5740/5740-pdf.pdf
https://www.amazon.com/Tractatus-Logico-Philosophicus-Routledge-Classics-123/dp/0415254086
https://www.amazon.com/What-Analytic-Philosophy-Hans-Johann-Glock/dp/0521694264
>>16233710
>Philosophy is tied too much to the humanities to ever really be anything else
wrong, philosophy is universal and dynamic. it can be applied to anything, from science to humanities. what background do you come from when you make this statement?

Anonymous at Fri, 14 Jun 2024 04:04:54 UTC No. 16233863

>>16233653
Neither is Daniel Dennett. He's a caricature of someone who sucks at philosophy.

Anonymous at Fri, 14 Jun 2024 04:47:07 UTC No. 16233916

>>16233831
>it can be applied to anything
Philosophy cannot be "applied" at all because there is nothing to apply. Philosophy has neither a methodology nor any objective knowledge. It's a big nothingburger. A pseudointellectual excuse for midwitted social rejects to experience an illusion of being smart.

Anonymous at Fri, 14 Jun 2024 05:14:04 UTC No. 16233993

>>16233653
Why not? What qualifies one to call themselves a philosopher?

Anonymous at Fri, 14 Jun 2024 05:16:30 UTC No. 16233997

Can you ever truly know that you cannot know nuffin?

Anonymous at Fri, 14 Jun 2024 06:27:00 UTC No. 16234079

>>16226612
The jenga piece will be a physically technogically burly jenga piece, anon

Anonymous at Fri, 14 Jun 2024 06:44:56 UTC No. 16234098

>>16231882
>muh underlying philosophical assumptions
I am not him so I cannot say without looking to quote him. Funny how quick that fell apart! I like to say "in the spirit of X" or "aiming at X". Both compensate the other. In the absence of sensibility the overarching goal should elucidate the aim. In the absence of an overarching goal the sensibility will find a goal worth aiming. Pure experiment monkeys are the ones who treat science as religion. The philosophers are prone to solipsism ignoring data but may have a rationale that trumps the whole line of reasoning.
Example: Peaceful protestors cure coronavirus by fighting racism...wow so much data very science yes I follow your science rules, science king. Solipsism is thus wise to blindly ignore the experts and join the angry "idiots" mocked on television.
We all know when Jesus freaks get rekt in medical, geological, historical debates because this solipsism is as powerful as queens checkmating society by handling business with only less than bareminimum need to know basis of frequent marketable popularity contests.

Anonymous at Fri, 14 Jun 2024 06:52:58 UTC No. 16234104

>>16234079
And legally and musically complex on the next rung of jenga pieces

Anonymous at Fri, 14 Jun 2024 06:55:23 UTC No. 16234106

>>16234104
I think the bottom of the jenga tower it is family and marriage (remember Rome do not out source your Caesar)

Anonymous at Fri, 14 Jun 2024 07:31:38 UTC No. 16234132

>>16226485
>analytic philosopher

why are u wasting your life and my tax money?

Anonymous at Fri, 14 Jun 2024 07:35:27 UTC No. 16234138

>>16226485
>I reseach words that already exist in the dictionary
Prove that you've done anything except waste paper and electricity.

Anonymous at Fri, 14 Jun 2024 10:12:52 UTC No. 16234274

>>16234132
>oh no no no, not muh heckin tax money
>my tax money is only for Ukraine, not for philosophy

Anonymous at Fri, 14 Jun 2024 17:26:45 UTC No. 16234775

>>16229603
Why the fuck is Electrical so bad? It's possibly the hardest engineering major.

Anonymous at Sat, 15 Jun 2024 03:14:27 UTC No. 16235634

>>16233916
>Philosophy cannot be "applied" at all because there is nothing to apply. Philosophy has neither a methodology nor any objective knowledge. It's a big nothingburger. A pseudointellectual excuse for midwitted social rejects to experience an illusion of being smart.
more retards.... i swear, you are another person who's illiterate at philosophy

Anonymous at Sat, 15 Jun 2024 06:06:29 UTC No. 16235796

The vice of name-calling is to an extent inherent to all the formal sciences: logic, math, CS, even linguistics (at least the part that deals with syntax), but at least in each of those it is a side-effect of their main goal: to create new knowledge by analyzing their subject matter carefully and precisely.

In contrast, I'm not sure if analytic philosophy even has a coherent subject matter to call its own, and hence it's hard to shake off the feeling that analytic philosophers are merely engaging in name-calling, with nothing to show for it.

Anonymous at Sat, 15 Jun 2024 07:55:23 UTC No. 16235902

>>16235796
>In contrast, I'm not sure if analytic philosophy even has a coherent subject matter to call its own, and hence it's hard to shake off the feeling that analytic philosophers are merely engaging in name-calling, with nothing to show for it.
philosophy of language, mathematics, and science

Anonymous at Sat, 15 Jun 2024 08:45:54 UTC No. 16235959

>>16235902
>philosophy of language, mathematics, and science
That's what you find in pop-science books, written by authors who are either unwilling or unable to present material worthy of contemplation or even attention from actual subject matter experts.
Surely you can do better than that?

Anonymous at Sat, 15 Jun 2024 08:54:24 UTC No. 16235969

>>16235634
>after studying almost 3000 years of philosophical discourse the best argument I can come up with is a shallow insult
Thanks for proving my point.

Anonymous at Sat, 15 Jun 2024 09:00:31 UTC No. 16235978

>>16229603
>>16232504
Philosophy is a subject for midwit retards who want to feel smart and useful but aren't intelligent enough for actual hard subjects.

Anonymous at Sat, 15 Jun 2024 09:01:32 UTC No. 16235979

>>16233651
Multiverse is already a philosophy subject retard.

Anonymous at Sat, 15 Jun 2024 13:57:39 UTC No. 16236309

>>16235959
do you understand how language works, right? if you don't then this is what I mean:
>philosophy of language
>philosophy of science
>philosophy of math

Anonymous at Sat, 15 Jun 2024 14:00:53 UTC No. 16236315

>>16235969
what's the point of dismantling an argument where there is none? sorry buddy but your """argument""" is laughable joke. a retard argument deserves a retard answer

Anonymous at Sat, 15 Jun 2024 14:02:55 UTC No. 16236318

>>16235979
*philosophical physics subject
>>16235978
>Philosophy is a subject for midwit retards who want to feel smart and useful but aren't intelligent enough for actual hard subjects.
>muh hard subjects
I can guarantee you haven't know shit about applying philosophy in hard and soft sciences

Anonymous at Sat, 15 Jun 2024 14:26:44 UTC No. 16236357

>>16236315
I didn't make an argument, I stated a fact. You seem to be philosophically underprivileged if you are unable to engage with this fact. If you need further clarification feel free to ask questions. But dismissing it without understanding is the opposite of philosophy.

Anonymous at Sat, 15 Jun 2024 15:16:31 UTC No. 16236386

>>16228191
Kinda being reductive here, what's a "humanities discipline" in your opinion? Linguistics aims to model language based on observations and studies made on actual people. At least certain treatments of linguistics. Systematic organization of knowledge based on testable models is what science is about no? Why can't something lie in the overlap between humanities and science?

Anonymous at Sat, 15 Jun 2024 15:39:49 UTC No. 16236394

I'd expect such superficiality from a physicist, but the mathematician is what makes me feel shame

Anonymous at Sat, 15 Jun 2024 21:30:00 UTC No. 16236862

>>16236394
kek

Anonymous at Sat, 15 Jun 2024 21:31:44 UTC No. 16236864

>>16236386
as far as I know: humanities is an umbrella term for linguistics, art, literature, philosophy, music, and etc. linguistics cross paths with social science, yes, but at the end of the day it's still part of humanities

Anonymous at Sat, 15 Jun 2024 22:03:50 UTC No. 16236907

>>16226612
>we’ll be here modeling your behavior and analyzing your power structure
you sound like an economist, not a mathead

Anonymous at Sat, 15 Jun 2024 22:10:05 UTC No. 16236920

>>16236907
Math grows through motivating observations that need rigorous explaining and the depth of physicists inanity is an infinite well of paradoxes

Anonymous at Sat, 15 Jun 2024 22:12:42 UTC No. 16236927

>>16236920
so?

Anonymous at Sun, 16 Jun 2024 01:02:49 UTC No. 16237119

>>16226485
I ended philosophy and nobody even knows who I am lol.

Anonymous at Sun, 16 Jun 2024 01:36:11 UTC No. 16237171

>>16237119
Elaborate/

Anonymous at Sun, 16 Jun 2024 01:44:08 UTC No. 16237180

>>16237171
On what?

Anonymous at Sun, 16 Jun 2024 01:49:58 UTC No. 16237191

>>16237171
If you don't ask it means you don't care enough which means you don't deserve to know.

Anonymous at Sun, 16 Jun 2024 01:51:04 UTC No. 16237192

>>16226485
The person who cleans the sewers do important shit, you are just pretending to be doing important shit to deceive yourself.

Anonymous at Sun, 16 Jun 2024 01:51:29 UTC No. 16237194

>>16237191
>ended philosophy
This is an interesting statement.
How did you do it?

Anonymous at Sun, 16 Jun 2024 02:09:18 UTC No. 16237219

>>16237194
Philosophy is love of wisdom. Once you have all the wisdom you need, then you can start just acting and doing. The wisdom you need might be different than the wisdom I need, so I can't tell you what wisdom you need unless you ask a specific question relevant to your life.

Anonymous at Sun, 16 Jun 2024 03:11:15 UTC No. 16237288

>>16226485
philosophy is to science what alchemy is to chemistry

Anonymous at Sun, 16 Jun 2024 03:13:49 UTC No. 16237290

>>16234775
its good, it just doesn't depend that much in verbal IQ

Anonymous at Sun, 16 Jun 2024 10:36:21 UTC No. 16237614

the greatest asset of philosophy is also its greatest weakness. by asset I mean the way you do philosophy. unlike science, there is no standard nor method to follow when doing philosophy. this means that anyone can do philosophy with their own way and method but this also makes it harder to distinguish pseudophilosophy from legitimate philosophy, unlike science

Anonymous at Sun, 16 Jun 2024 23:21:29 UTC No. 16238588

>>16234775
>It's possibly the hardest engineering major.
elaborate?