Image not available

1280x640

philosophy.jpg

🗑️ 🧵 Untitled Thread

Anonymous No. 16278228

Philosophy is a stem Field.
Because philosophy created foundation of all stem fields(logic and analysis). Philosophy created scientific method and we can trace all of our stem fields to the philosophy. All stem fields use mathematics that is applied philosophy in a numerical(philosophical concept) way. That's the reason science was called natural philosophy. Proof me wrong

Anonymous No. 16278257

cope. your major is worthless.

Anonymous No. 16278261

>>16278228
McDonald's

🗑️ Anonymous No. 16278267

/sci/ is the philosophy board end of discussion

Anonymous No. 16278274

>>16278228
>some armchair dude hundreds of years ago used the word "logic", therefore my infantile language games are just as valid as your scientific facts
Stop committing intellectual property theft.

Image not available

1638x1230

college-degrees-s....png

Anonymous No. 16278276

>>16278257
>>16278261
People majoring in philosophy have almost the same starting salary as chemists. And very successful philosophers earn the same amount as mechanical engineers

Image not available

760x408

Fields_of_Purity_....png

Anonymous No. 16278292

>>16278228
Philosopher is not a STEM field.
Epistemologically it's way higher than STEM.
It's only people who don't fully understand the study of nature of knowledge and reality in present society that automatically defaults into thinking empiricism aka STEM is the gold standard everything ought to aspire to.
Comparing the two is like comparing a siege engineer with Alexander the Great.

Anonymous No. 16278313

>>16278292
>pic
Logicians are part of philosophy. Because logic= field of philosophy, therefore philosophy are represented by logicians in that pic. That's the reason stem fields were called a natural philosophy, but first humanities fields like: music, law and history were not part of philosophy or humanitarian philosophy

Anonymous No. 16278329

>>16278274
Math is an applied philosophy. Math directly evolved from philosophy. You can replace language game with number games and you will get childish and premitive meaning of mathematics

Image not available

799x261

1720765914244.jpg

Anonymous No. 16278349

>>16278292

Anonymous No. 16278352

>>16278329
Math has always been the polar opposite of philosophy. Math proves its claims whereas philosophy just expects you to believe its bullshit based on subjective faith. Math produces valuable tools for our understanding of the world while philosophy in its entire history never answered any relevant question. It has always been like this. Even in ancient Greece we had geniuses like Euclid and Archimedes on the one hand advancing humanity with math, and Plato and Aristotle on the other hand talking baseless bullshit of no value other than creating the illusion of pseudointellectualism in their readers.

Image not available

922x529

1720766040342.png

Anonymous No. 16278354

>>16278313
Logic is pure math. Philosocucks will never understand logic.

Anonymous No. 16278356

>>16278352
>Math proves its claims
Prove the math axoims.

Image not available

741x643

iq-by-college-maj....png

Anonymous No. 16278358

>>16278354
People majoring in philosophy have the same iq as mathematicans. They can and do understand logic, because it's part of their field, and many people who major in philosophy also major in other stem fields

Anonymous No. 16278361

>>16278356
There is no such thing as "the math axioms". If you ever engaged with foundational math you'd know this. Uneducated philosopleb.

Anonymous No. 16278364

>>16278361
>muh field has no axiomatic assumptions
You'd know your axioms if you weren't so engrossed in academic vocabulary pseud.

Anonymous No. 16278372

>>16278352
>Euclid and Archimedes
Both are philosophers influenced by platonic school. Also Aristotle used same methods modern scientists use nowadays
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aristotelian_physics
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Aristotle%27s_biology&diffonly=true

Anonymous No. 16278376

>>16278358
Ask a philosophy student to explain basic shit like Skolem's paradox or the difference between Gödel's completeness and incompleteness theorems and they will just give you that fluoridated stare.

Anonymous No. 16278378

>>16278376
>um just like um we should like um treat eachother equal man

Anonymous No. 16278387

>>16278376
>Skolem's paradox
Phisophical concept. The only problem I see if student's don't understand this thing is with academic philosophy lack of introduction to mathematical logic. But I can argue that philosophy students could easily understand this because this concept is philosophical in its nature considering that they have same iq

Anonymous No. 16278388

STEM = Science, Tech, Engineering, Math
Philosophy is not really a science, and it is usually grouped with the humanities/liberal arts. Not saying its useless, its just not STEM.

Image not available

1014x1010

4ed75re8758658.png

Anonymous No. 16278392

Mathfags ever fancy themselves transcend rest of the sciences.

Yes, if physics is the king of science then math can indeed be said to be the god of science.
But unfortunately, your axioms are still empirical in nature, that makes you hardstuck in STEM.
/sci/ is your home, now and forever, better get use to it mathfags.

Anonymous No. 16278399

>>16278228
>philosophy created foundation of all stem fields
Ancient philosophy did. Modern philosophy != ancient philosophy

Anonymous No. 16278404

>>16278361
>There is no such thing as "the math axioms"
prove a + 0 = a

Anonymous No. 16278411

>>16278399
We talk about philosophy in general. Ancient philosophy is foundation of modern philosophy. So the methods of ancient philosophers are valid in context of modern philosophy

Barkon Approved Post No. 16278413

U gay bros? Philosophy is for gigaminds.

Anonymous No. 16278419

>>16278388
>Philosophy is not really a science
It is something in between science and math. Both are stem

Anonymous No. 16278426

>>16278419
Pretty sure both hardcore philosophers and STEM would disagree with you.
Philosophers don't want to be seen to have stooped down into emperical imperfection.
STEM don't want others that produce nothing material in nature cut into their slice of the pie.

Anonymous No. 16278441

>>16278411
>We talk about philosophy in general.
We can't talk about philosophy in general. Ancient philosophy was an early attempt at science. It didn't co-exist with their ancient equivalent of science, it's literally what their science was. Hippocrates was just another philosopher for example, despite practicing medicine. Modern science is a refinement of ancient philosophy, while modern philosophy is a stubborn attempt to use that outdated methodology to answer questions science is not (yet) capable of answering.

Anonymous No. 16278445

>>16278361
Are you saying this because ZFC ultimately fails as the fundamentals of mathematics? You do realize that this just means math is an empirical scienc, right?

Anonymous No. 16278447

>>16278426
>empirical imperfection
Lmao, the pseud idealist reveals his lack of phronesis. Your episteme is only a larp without nous. Socrates wouldn't even touch your bussy if you twerked right in front of him.

Anonymous No. 16278478

>>16278447
>empirical larper
You will never be one of them.
The rest of /sci/ have already perfected their empirical methods in their respective fields down the centuries; they don't need some outsider that produces nothing material to help them justify their position in an arena they care nothing about.

Back in your own arena, you are viewed as nothing but a sellout by your philosophical brethren.

Barkon Approved Post No. 16278483

>>16278478
Being a philosopher is like being the perfect kind of fan(as in football fan). You're NOT the advisor, you just perform and support things(a pure kind of support). Philosophers are the backbone of all education.

Anonymous No. 16278487

>>16278483
You can be a fan.
But some people apparently want to larp as a player.

Barkon Approved Post No. 16278488

>>16278487
Well they're not doing philosophy properly or they have a second pro.

Anonymous No. 16278497

>>16278404
>prove a + 0 = a
It's obvious
QED

Anonymous No. 16278503

The real redpill is that pure mathematics belongs to the humanities.

Anonymous No. 16278506

>>16278404
>prove obvious shit
>prove that a man is not a woman
>muh sealioning
>you cannot know nuffin, not even the obvious
>objective truth is le bad
Shill detected, opinion discarded.

Anonymous No. 16278514

>>16278506
Don't even understand half of those points. Have fun with your scientific theories getting deboonked every century, while euclid is still right after 2000 years

Barkon Approved Post No. 16278516

>>16278506
Retard.

Anonymous No. 16278518

>>16278228
Your "proof" is wrong in every way possible, but it's still true that philosophy is a branch of science.

Barkon Approved Post No. 16278519

>>16278518
No. Science is a branch of mathematics, philosophy is a branch of math and literacy.

Barkon Approved Post No. 16278520

You people are so retarded. Go back and stay in your academic crèche and be stupid in SILENCE.

Anonymous No. 16278521

>>16278519
Wrong and retarded

Barkon Approved Post No. 16278522

>>16278521
You're retarded bro. How does finding out about something bare any similarity to finding comfort in survival?

Anonymous No. 16278523

>>16278514
>Don't even understand half of those points.
As expected from a philosopleb.

Anonymous No. 16278524

>>16278522
Take your meds schizo

Anonymous No. 16278526

>>16278478
>Back in your own arena
My arena is polymathy. The opinions of inferior ACKadummic scum don't affect me. You want to tell me what truth is but you don't even know your own gender? Top lel, you failed.

Barkon Approved Post No. 16278527

>>16278524
>>16278523
Spastics detected hurr durr.

Anonymous No. 16278528

>>16278523
You sure you aren't the philosophyfag? You keep ranting about men being women and no objective truth, while mathematicians objectively can't get disproven

Barkon Approved Post No. 16278529

>>16278524
I've got some meds for you faggot. You're a faggot. the former sentence was the best med for you, it explains what you are so you can make the right decision to kys quickly.

Anonymous No. 16278533

>>16278392
We’re running the show

Anonymous No. 16278535

>>16278528
Perhaps you'd understand the argument if you stopped taking girl hormones. Because you're projecting again.

Anonymous No. 16278537

>>16278404
>what is a supposed to be
>it’s the identity element of the group, bro

Barkon Approved Post No. 16278538

Herp herp herp herf HERF HERF HERF HERF HERF HERF HERF HERF herp

Anonymous No. 16278540

Based St Barkon owning the pseuds in this ITT

Barkon Approved Post No. 16278541

Philosophers are the ones who go deep into their learning experience and stand as perfect examples of learned men.

Anonymous No. 16278542

>>16278533
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XC7eRmnfZ_A

Anonymous No. 16278547

>>16278518
Explain why I'm wrong

Image not available

505x572

1720656962976527.png

Barkon Approved Post No. 16278569

>>16278547
>>16278542

Image not available

1070x1042

1720782813765.png

Anonymous No. 16278571

All of philosophy is just language games and highly neurotic individuals misunderstanding each other

Anonymous No. 16278575

>>16278569
Not an argument

Anonymous No. 16278678

>>16278497
Very good Anon, that's called an axiom! Want a cookie?

Anonymous No. 16278690

Philosophy is just applied theology

Image not available

500x500

artworks-0abSUkZL....jpg

Barkon Approved Post No. 16278693

>>16278690

Anonymous No. 16278696

barely-interesting thread full of stem enthusiasts making philosophical claims about the validity of the field itself

Anonymous No. 16278698

>>16278696
>philosocucks: philosophy means thinking hard and questioning the validity and meaning of everything
>le me, an intellectual: *questions the meaning and validity of philosophy itself*
>philosocucks: nooooooooo, not like this!!!! *chokes on onions milk*
You cannot beat my metaphilosophy

Anonymous No. 16278715

Philosophy is to science what science is to engineering.
A is to B what/as B is to C
A=B, B=C
So A=C must be true.

By this logic, philosophers are also engineers. But honestly, how confident are you using a bridge or living in a house built by philosophers? Clearly this logic must be incorrect somehow. Now question for the class is where is the error in logic?
Also philosophers are mathematicians too

Anonymous No. 16278738

>>16278228
Philosophy is a glorified English major.
Philosophy was mildly useful in the middle ages before the scientific revolution.

Anonymous No. 16278743

>>16278228
You are a woman. Proof? A woman popped you out of her vagina. Qed. Post tiddies bbg

Anonymous No. 16278744

>>16278738
>Philosophy was mildly useful in the middle ages
Useful how? Philosophical dogma just held back scientific progress and gave us nothing positive. In the middle ages people were racist af due to philosophy. Only thanks to science we learned that race is not real.

Anonymous No. 16278748

>>16278744
Good point.

Anonymous No. 16278751

>>16278404
It came to me in a dream.

Anonymous No. 16278754

>>16278228
>Philosophy is a stem Field.
No dear, STEM is a subset of philosophy.

Image not available

319x349

Absolute+truths+N....jpg

Anonymous No. 16278757

Anonymous No. 16278760

>>16278738
What about the replication crisis?

Science today is done like they’re following a recipe in a cookbook and they’ve learned to take shortcuts, how to twist it to their advantage. If everyone understands the epistemology of science then replication crisis would be impossible.

Anonymous No. 16278765

>>16278503
This

Anonymous No. 16278772

>>16278760
You need to stop telling people they can do anything when they're clearly talentless and the replication crisis will be solved.

Anonymous No. 16278805

>>16278744
>Only thanks to science we learned that race is not real
Hahaha

Anonymous No. 16278810

>>16278754
This

Anonymous No. 16278825

>>16278760
>What about the replication crisis?
It's not a real thing in any of the mature sciences
>If everyone understands the epistemology of science
There is not and cannot be an epistemology of science, because epistemology is outdated.

Anonymous No. 16278845

>>16278757
Suzie is right,numeral system wasn't specified.
>but you should assume it's decimal
Neither me nor Suzie are under any obligation to assume shit, my answer is 11 and its correct, get fucked bitch

Anonymous No. 16278863

>>16278276
Why is computer science so high? I did a double major in philosophy and CS and at this point I think you stand better chances working in philosophy versus the impossible to use CS degree as there is no clear process to make all of that money in CS without a billion extracurricular project, connections, nepotism, applying to 5000 jobs and luck while with philosophy you can shake the right hand and bullshit your way through shit or go to law school and do bullshit work. And all of the latest news stories are saying how important the social skills of being a humanities major are with AI making lots of the other tech skills obsolete as being able to bullshit is eternal.

Anonymous No. 16279046

>>16278863
Retarded response

Anonymous No. 16279056

>>16278571
What happens if the light of the room is changed and the color of the object is altered? Which is the 'true' color of the object?

Anonymous No. 16279074

>>16278678
Nope, it's a new proof technique I've developed: proof by "it's kinda obvious if you think about it". I've already proven P=NP with it, just waiting for my millennium prize

Anonymous No. 16279093

>>16279046
Retarded response

Anonymous No. 16279141

>>16279093
>Retarded response
Retarded response

Barkon Approved Post No. 16279156

>>16279141
Fag

Anonymous No. 16279182

>>16278228
>science was called natural philosophy
>was
Now it's called science retard.

Anonymous No. 16279296

>>16279182
PhD still stands for doctor of PHILOSOPHY too.

Anonymous No. 16279330

>define your field as encompassing every aspect of the human thought
>LOOK DUDE IT ENCOMPASSES EVERYTHING
genius

Anonymous No. 16279825

>>16279182
Did you recive your Phd in science & math? Mr philosophy doctor?

Anonymous No. 16279826

>>16278503
Why?

Anonymous No. 16279836

>>16278228

Agreed, philosophy is based.
To all the retards here saying math proves shit: philosophy also proves shit using the assumptions it makes. Just as how math proves stuff using axioms as a base. Change the axioms and you get arbitrary math. Change the assumptions and you get varying philosophy, as is the case with every major philosopher.

And for the science retards, have you forgotten that science still relies on philosophy? There are core assumptions of science, including that there are physical phenomena or objects in the world, that we can study them as observers, that we too are physical objects ourselves and so on. When science hits a roadblock (like as is the case with consciousness or studying time), the assumptions on what we can or can’t study about the objects/phenomena change to facilitate it. Regardless, they are assumptions, but excellent assumptions, and have served us well. Do you think Newton, if he got to come to present day, would accept that radio telescope data is scientifically valid? He’d probably argue that invisible rays hitting instruments whose internal workings we can’t see, producing data that is a bunch of numbers instead of a tangible phenomenon like a prismatic rainbow, is unscientific and bullshit. However, we have evolved our assumptions of what is and isn’t an experiment or a study or an instrument or observer since then. Thus, science too has assumptions, they aren’t perfect, and they evolve as it progresses. All proofs of scientific theories also rely on these assumptions, like math, and like philosophy which birthed both.

Anonymous No. 16279863

>>16278352
wow this is one of the more ignorant things I've seen on this board. Math literally fucking IS philosophy.

Anonymous No. 16279906

>>16278441
Philosophy isn't outdated because it uses scientific method

Anonymous No. 16280009

>>16278358
Why philosophy students has the same iq as mathematicians?

Anonymous No. 16280054

>>16280009
They have a high verbal IQ like English majors but shit tier non verbal IQ like all non science plebs

Anonymous No. 16280080

>>16280009
Because mathematics has higher amount of diversity women, without them they would have the same ratio as with philosophy, and iq would be higher

Anonymous No. 16280081

>>16280009
Because Mathematics is being watered down by females who are being forcibly injected into Maths circles to fill their quotas and serve their inclusion and diversity programs. They can't do the same thing in philosophy because it is not being shoved up mainstream consciousness and popular culture thus not a façade of their political agenda. WOMEN IN PHILOSOPHY doesn't seem so catchy as WOMEN IN STEM!!1!!1!1

Barkon, Vard and Worl No. 16280102

None of you are philosophers :@

Anonymous No. 16280108

>>16278257
Polly want a cracker?

Barkon, Vard and Worl No. 16280110

>>16280108
No.

Barkon, Vard and Worl No. 16280111

>>16280108
I get the boy and the heron part with the hermit.