Philosophy Has Made Plenty of Progress • Hacker News Board

Re: Philosophy Has Made Plenty of Progress

#241

Post by mopierotti » Mon, Nov 05, 2018, 7:42 PM UTC

JackFr wrote: post #239

mfoy_ wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not saying humans are infallible, but trying to argue that "the scientific method isn't perfect because people aren't perfect" is nonsense, especially if the conclusion you want to draw is that "therefore we should respect faith as an alternative means of determining truth". The scientific method IS the best tool our species has when it comes to determining truths about the laws of nature. In fact, it's practical…

> The scientific method IS the best tool our species has when it comes to determining truths about the laws of nature. I agree. But I also believe freedom is better than slavery. I value wisdom over ignorance. And I believe those things without any proof. The scientific method cannot prove to me that murder is wrong, and yet I hold it to be true. So despite the fact that I agree with the power of the scientific metho…

Proof is a hard goalpost in any domain, but science, and by extension the scientific method, can support the belief that murder is wrong through a couple plausible paths.

The study of evolution gives a mechanism through which a sense of morality is 'hardwired' into us for its adaptive benefits. Or, less teleologically, the study of our own brains can provide evidence for us as humans just not liking certain things.

Additionally, a technique like group simulation could show that allowing murder is against the average individual's interest.

I'm not claiming I come to my beliefs through deliberate scientific reasoning, but I do think that science has important things to say about most things.

Re: Philosophy Has Made Plenty of Progress

#242

Post by sheepmullet » Mon, Nov 05, 2018, 7:43 PM UTC

mfoy_ wrote: post #160

FabHK wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow, you are really equating * subscribing to an aesthetic hunch about fundamental physics (which has no consequences on how to lead our lives at all!), with * subscribing to an epistemology of revelation, and the ancient, unethical, incoherent scribblings of the Abrahamic religions (with big, bad consequences for our lives), as both being instances of some harmless, justified (or justifiable) "faith"? That's very wr…

Good response! To add to your points, GP also misses a really important distinction between science and religion and the way each system arrives at conclusions. Science is merely a set of tools and processes, nothing more. Seriously, NOTHING more. If, as GP says, you are taking it on faith that some "scientific conclusion" is true, you're merely deferring expertise on the matter. Much like when your tech support guy…

> With Religion, there is nothing you can do to understand it.

I don’t think that’s true - I think an atheist can gain a lot of understanding about human nature by reading religious works.

> you cannot do anything to investigate the veracity of those claims. Truly, this is the most authoritarian of world views

In practice that is true for science too. I take it on faith that scientists are trustworthy and doing their best to uncover truth.

Re: Philosophy Has Made Plenty of Progress

#243

Post by louwrentius » Mon, Nov 05, 2018, 7:53 PM UTC

camelNotation wrote: post #235

ripsawridge wrote: post #222

The only thing our world needs now is a reorientation away from growth at all costs into a mode of life that values the simple, the close by, the cheap. I don't see this guy giving a damn about that problem. Instead he tosses off bon mots about Popper and Gödel, and intones comfortably that in his view his peers have the right idea because they converge on atheism/agnosticism. Wow. The world is saved. There is a clas…

I like you. There's been a total over-correction away from religion and we've lost sight of why it evolved in the first place. Social scientists have long known that there is nothing rational about the decisions we make, and certainly not in groups. Religion may have led us to quite a bit of violence in the past and might not have given us self-driving cars, but simply understanding the universe is not going to be en…

Religion is not about certainty or uncertainty but about a higher purpose, about meaning. This life, this pain, this suffering needs to amount to something or why bother continuing?

Religion doesn't seem the answer, it always creates more problems than it solves. It thrives on suffering. Because suffering creates a need for religion, it sustains itself this way.

Can we find meaning and purpose in our existence in a way that isn't so detrimental to quality of life, now and in our future?

Re: Philosophy Has Made Plenty of Progress

#244

Post by petra » Mon, Nov 05, 2018, 7:57 PM UTC

ripsawridge wrote: post #222

The only thing our world needs now is a reorientation away from growth at all costs into a mode of life that values the simple, the close by, the cheap. I don't see this guy giving a damn about that problem. Instead he tosses off bon mots about Popper and Gödel, and intones comfortably that in his view his peers have the right idea because they converge on atheism/agnosticism. Wow. The world is saved. There is a clas…

Zen monks usually don't share ideas.

They try to share experiences, about certain possibilities of the human mind, and how they feel.

But those are weird, complex, possibly frightening, and they are also sometimes mis-communicated[1]. Also - they challenge deeply held personal beliefs.

So it's natural that people will resist.

[1]The nature of enlightenment was always hard to explain. Until you listen to Gary Weber(http://happiness-beyond-thought.com/):

He explains it simply - you know that internal voice, that's always focused about "I"? and always remembering the past and making-plans/dreaming about the future ?

Think about a time you'd had less of that ? so it's possible to make this voice disappear.

And than - you think when you want to think, when you need ideas they sometimes pop into you head, like regular creativity , but most of the time - peace.

Re: Philosophy Has Made Plenty of Progress

#245

Post by vec » Mon, Nov 05, 2018, 7:58 PM UTC

mfoy_ wrote: post #225

vec wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> With Religion, there is nothing you can do to understand it. You can only "have faith". If your spiritual leader or holy book tells you the world is a certain way, you can only believe it, or disbelieve it, you cannot do anything to investigate the veracity of those claims. Truly, this is the most authoritarian of world views: Believe this because I tell you to! There's a few thousand years of Talmudic scholarship…

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the Talmud is basically the collected notes on the study of the Torah, which was was supposedly (capital-R) Revealed by a supernatural authority on Mount Sinai. Just because people spent a long time debating the interpretation of their holy book (and accompanying oral tradition) does not make it any less grounded in the supernatural, at the end of the day. Followers still have to either b…

You're not wrong, per se, but you are parroting the fundamentalist party line. Maybe I've just got a unique perspective on the issue (I'm a Unitarian Universalist; everyone at my church respects my atheism as a sincere and personally fulfilling spiritual journey and a valuable perspective within the community at large), but I don't think science and religion are as opposed as the cultural narrative would suggest.

Religion, broadly speaking, aims to answer a variety of questions; most foundationally but least importantly "how does the world work?". And science indisputably provides better answers, which is why many theological schools of thought are more than happy to cede their authority in the topic. It free them up to focus on the more important question: "given the world, how best should we live in it?".

It turns out that narrativizing and anthropomorphizing the world around us provides an immensely powerful framing device for thinking critically about community values and for approaching consensus on what those values should be, both across cultural lines and between generations.

In other words it doesn't really matter whether the Torah was divinely inspired or not. It's the grain of sand that the Talmudic pearl accreted around, no more, no less.

Re: Philosophy Has Made Plenty of Progress

#246

Post by sheepmullet » Mon, Nov 05, 2018, 8:00 PM UTC

salmonfamine wrote: post #152

brobdingnagians wrote: post #45

Sounds like a clever, witty, and charming guy. Would be very interesting to talk to him; I like his style of talking. Curiously ironic that he cites a consensus in personal belief in atheism and agnostics among philosophers (at least, modern philosophers, most philosophers in history believed in God..) as a good reason for philosophy not accepting the existence of God, which appears to be a popularity contest (and ec…

It's hard to actually address this comment since it's such a ramble, but I think you make some disingenuous rhetorical moves that deserve to be addressed. You employ a rhetorical move that some theists have used in the past -- namely, casting doubt on the veracity of scientific beliefs by painting them in the guise of religion. This is also a convenient move that lets you characterize huge swaths of academia that dis…

> namely, casting doubt on the veracity of scientific beliefs by painting them in the guise of religion.

You think he is commenting on the scientific method but he is really commenting on human nature.

People really are treating Science as a kind of religion.

Understanding this motivation is important because it shows the precarious position we are in - any event which causes a loss of faith in “Science” the religion could quickly turn our culture away from its relatively pro-science culture.

Re: Philosophy Has Made Plenty of Progress

#247

Post by 3pt14159 » Mon, Nov 05, 2018, 8:05 PM UTC

gjm11 wrote: post #233

3pt14159 wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Look, I don't want to get all in the weeds here because it would complicate things unnecessarily, but if it's really that simple to you then you should know that this argument contains a logical falacy: Argumentum ad consequentiam or appeal to consequences . Once you let go of thinking that truth is knowable you'll realize that there is some faith that you have. It's not in science per-se; but it might be faith that…

"I believe in science because it works" is not an argumentum ad consequentiam. What characterizes an AaC is the following structure: if X were true then the consequences would be good/bad; therefore X is (probably) true/false. So if eli_gottlieb were saying "I believe in science because it would be lovely if science were right", that would be an AaC. But that's not at all what he's saying. The form of his argument is…

See how you used the word seem there? That's where the little faith bits seep in.

In the seems.

Re: Philosophy Has Made Plenty of Progress

#248

Post by gaius » Mon, Nov 05, 2018, 8:08 PM UTC

mfoy_ wrote: post #160

FabHK wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow, you are really equating * subscribing to an aesthetic hunch about fundamental physics (which has no consequences on how to lead our lives at all!), with * subscribing to an epistemology of revelation, and the ancient, unethical, incoherent scribblings of the Abrahamic religions (with big, bad consequences for our lives), as both being instances of some harmless, justified (or justifiable) "faith"? That's very wr…

Good response! To add to your points, GP also misses a really important distinction between science and religion and the way each system arrives at conclusions. Science is merely a set of tools and processes, nothing more. Seriously, NOTHING more. If, as GP says, you are taking it on faith that some "scientific conclusion" is true, you're merely deferring expertise on the matter. Much like when your tech support guy…

you cannot do anything to investigate the veracity of those claims

Sheer nonsense. The Enlightenment, the greatest period of scientific advancement in human history, was driven by people who saw it as their sacred duty to understand God's Creation. Atheism in the form of the Soviet Union dragged us backwards.

Re: Philosophy Has Made Plenty of Progress

#249

Post by camelNotation » Mon, Nov 05, 2018, 8:13 PM UTC

louwrentius wrote: post #243

camelNotation wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I like you. There's been a total over-correction away from religion and we've lost sight of why it evolved in the first place. Social scientists have long known that there is nothing rational about the decisions we make, and certainly not in groups. Religion may have led us to quite a bit of violence in the past and might not have given us self-driving cars, but simply understanding the universe is not going to be en…

Religion is not about certainty or uncertainty but about a higher purpose, about meaning. This life, this pain, this suffering needs to amount to something or why bother continuing? Religion doesn't seem the answer, it always creates more problems than it solves. It thrives on suffering. Because suffering creates a need for religion, it sustains itself this way. Can we find meaning and purpose in our existence in a w…

Religion does provide meaning and purpose, but that is hardly all it is "about."

Religion also provides inclusion for those that would otherwise feel outcast. It provides social structure and identity. It provides a framework for you to build culture upon. It acts as a moral guide for behavior. It unifies communities around central goals. It uses myth to convey inter-generational wisdom. It teaches rituals that improve mental and physical health. It provides dozens of important things.

The idea that religion is just about an individual doing X or Y to feel like they have "meaning" or "purpose" is nonsense. Religion evolved as the foundation of human social order. It's about communion and community, not self-indulgence. We know from our earliest architectural sites, like Gobekli Tepe, that religion preceded even the agrarian forms of human society. It's part of who and what we are.

It's extremely arrogant to call it detrimental, especially when our "post-religious" society - where everyone claims a god of their own but no one practices anything - has a workforce composed almost entirely of alienated, corporate slaves that lack more than half the things I mentioned in my second paragraph and a non-working population that suffers in silence because they offer no "economic benefit" to the rest. We are hardly enlightened in any meaningful sense of the word.

Re: Philosophy Has Made Plenty of Progress

#250

Post by szemet » Mon, Nov 05, 2018, 8:14 PM UTC

ripsawridge wrote: post #222

The only thing our world needs now is a reorientation away from growth at all costs into a mode of life that values the simple, the close by, the cheap. I don't see this guy giving a damn about that problem. Instead he tosses off bon mots about Popper and Gödel, and intones comfortably that in his view his peers have the right idea because they converge on atheism/agnosticism. Wow. The world is saved. There is a clas…

You know the problem, you know the solution and we doesn't even have to think about it: irrationality is ok if you have small environmental footprint. So this is the relevation needed by the "world" to be saved...

And now, if we can't afford people with different preferences, or intellectual interest (or - I guess - those who disagree the above - for some reason), what to do with them?