Philosophy as a public service • Hacker News Board

Re: Philosophy as a public service

#61

Post by crimsonalucard » Thu, Jan 02, 2020, 9:31 PM UTC

xamuel wrote: post #52

crimsonalucard wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes it's beautifully meta. This happens because everything that exists and doesn't exist including philosophy itself falls under the purview of philosophy. It's the ultimate definition given to a word. Now imagine this brain twisting concept: The Philosophy of "The Philosophy of philosophy." Yes discussions about philosophy are in itself philosophy and that by induction causes an infinite chain to form where you can…

Not sure what happened in the 2nd half of your post, it kind of went off the rails. But the in the 1st half, you're basically getting at the ordinal numbers. Now just drop the "philosophy" from it (which is just a placeholder, since you could replace it with anything else whatsoever and still get the same chains) and focus on the underlying structure---infinite chains of infinite chains, etc.---and you're actually st…

I think philosophical conjectures are ultimately useless. You can talk about abstract concepts all you want but you don't get anywhere unless you have rigor or formalism. This is why philosophy can do things like talk about logic and ethics and science and religion.

The post is ultimately a trap. I introduce a bit of a simplistic but semi-mind-bending concept but then when you get to the end you realize my true thoughts about philosophy. It's for all the philosophers out there who always tell me that even though I don't know it I'm actually talking about philosophy. Well it's kind of hard not to talk about it given the fact that the word is defined to encompass everything.

I think your post hits the nail on the head. If you want to learn about these concepts formal math is the way to go. The layman description I wrote is really not that deep though, it's all pedantic.

Re: Philosophy as a public service

#62

Post by gloriousduke » Thu, Jan 02, 2020, 9:44 PM UTC

shard972 wrote: post #14

jeliotj wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It begs the question of what philosophy is. If it is "love of wisdom", as the Ancient Greeks suggested, then it seeks to know all things. That is, it seeks knowledge of what is, not of what is most likely, which is the domain of modern science.

Postmodernist's would disagree with you heavily that the two domains intersect. Philosophy goal is uncover truth where science is restricted mostly to the realm of facts and empirical truths. An example would be the question of the meaning of life, science has little ability to answer this question other that to claim it doesn't actually exist or it's just a complex expression of atoms working together where with phi…

This may sound absurd, but you actually need some (mostly settled) philosophy to determine what “facts and empirical truths” are.

Re: Philosophy as a public service

#63

Post by dorchadas » Thu, Jan 02, 2020, 9:50 PM UTC

tieze wrote: post #55

rahuldottech wrote: post #7

Relatedly, if anyone is looking to get started with philosophy, Crash Course has a fantastic video series on it: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL8dPuuaLjXtNgK6MZucdY...

If you just have ears, History of Philosophy without any gaps is great podcast: https://historyofphilosophy.net/ . Great and thorough companion when I do the dishes.

And, if you'd rather read, he's also got a book series to go along with it. Volume 5 (on philosophy in ancient India) is set to be published later this year.

Re: Philosophy as a public service

#64

Post by simmanian » Thu, Jan 02, 2020, 10:18 PM UTC

xenologist wrote: post #50

I believe what the world needs now is philosophy. What we're experiencing is a crisis of meaning. Philosophy is a shield against meaninglessness and conceptual confusion. In an information environment full of overabundant conflicting and clashing signals, we need philosophy to straighten it out and confer order to the perceptual field. The fact that many people don't understand or hold philosophy in contempt is a maj…

I think the crisis of meaning is happening because existing philosophies do not provide enough value anymore in today's world. I believe a non-reductionist and non-dualistic worldview can be the solution. We must see that the world is not a "war of all men against all men" as Hobbes describes in the Leviathan, and realize we are all interdependent beings that exist as expressions of relationships, which we form together.

Re: Philosophy as a public service

#65

Post by Reedx » Thu, Jan 02, 2020, 10:19 PM UTC

abdullahkhalids wrote: post #53

dr_dshiv wrote: post #23

If you want to really understand philosophy, start with Pythagoras, the man coined the term Philosophy and Cosmos -- and conducted the first attested scientific experiment in history. His legacy, through Plato, was resurrected as a key element of the Renaissance and Enlightenment. It makes modern philosophy look like a sad farce since this legacy of modern thought probably isn't taught in a single modern philosophy c…

I have never understood this thing about being asked to study old texts in Philosophy. In no other field that I have studied have people suggested that my first introduction to the field must be a book written decades ago, forget two millennia ago. If I want to study physics, nobody tells me to read Newton or Einstein's paper. Instead I should read an introductory textbook, whose contents and presentation are much be…

That seems like a good idea on the surface, but there is value in things like philosophy that have lasted the test of time[1]. They've proven a level of robustness. Also if you just take a sample from a relatively short period, like 2 decades, there's danger of it reflecting current fashions[2].

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lindy_effect

2. http://www.paulgraham.com/say.html

Re: Philosophy as a public service

#66

Post by westoncb » Thu, Jan 02, 2020, 10:20 PM UTC

xenologist wrote: post #50

I believe what the world needs now is philosophy. What we're experiencing is a crisis of meaning. Philosophy is a shield against meaninglessness and conceptual confusion. In an information environment full of overabundant conflicting and clashing signals, we need philosophy to straighten it out and confer order to the perceptual field. The fact that many people don't understand or hold philosophy in contempt is a maj…

Here's an interesting new series addressing exactly the "crisis of meaning" issue you mention: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=54l8_ewcOlY

I've only gotten through the first lecture—and it does take him ~20 minutes to lay out something like the full plan for the lecture series, but he also paints a pretty interesting picture by the time he gets to that point.

David Chapman has also been writing on this subject, apparently from a somewhat related angle, for years: https://meaningness.com/

The two of them try reconciling their approaches here: https://letter.wiki/conversation/209

Re: Philosophy as a public service

#67

Post by dr_dshiv » Thu, Jan 02, 2020, 10:26 PM UTC

abdullahkhalids wrote: post #53

dr_dshiv wrote: post #23

If you want to really understand philosophy, start with Pythagoras, the man coined the term Philosophy and Cosmos -- and conducted the first attested scientific experiment in history. His legacy, through Plato, was resurrected as a key element of the Renaissance and Enlightenment. It makes modern philosophy look like a sad farce since this legacy of modern thought probably isn't taught in a single modern philosophy c…

I have never understood this thing about being asked to study old texts in Philosophy. In no other field that I have studied have people suggested that my first introduction to the field must be a book written decades ago, forget two millennia ago. If I want to study physics, nobody tells me to read Newton or Einstein's paper. Instead I should read an introductory textbook, whose contents and presentation are much be…

I'd recommend looking at "the quadrivium" by little wooden books. It is one of the most beautiful books ever made.

Since Pythagoras never wrote and was an empiricist, Pythagoreanism needs continual interpretation. But the core ideas, of Oneness, of "all is number" and that of fundamental harmonies in the Cosmos and psyche/soul — those are are perennial ideas of great value.

Re: Philosophy as a public service

#68

Post by dr_dshiv » Thu, Jan 02, 2020, 10:28 PM UTC

mod50ack wrote: post #24

dr_dshiv wrote: post #23

If you want to really understand philosophy, start with Pythagoras, the man coined the term Philosophy and Cosmos -- and conducted the first attested scientific experiment in history. His legacy, through Plato, was resurrected as a key element of the Renaissance and Enlightenment. It makes modern philosophy look like a sad farce since this legacy of modern thought probably isn't taught in a single modern philosophy c…

If my "modern philosophy course" you mean a course dealing with only modern philosophy, then of course not: they're not seeking to delve into the ancient history, but deal with whatever era is on the docket. That's not the point of the course. But philosophy majors at many universities do have to deal with that as well. It just isn't the focus of a course in modern or contemporary phil. But as for courses dealing wit…

The core ideas of Pythagoreanism are:

1. Oneness 2. "all is number" 3. There are fundamental harmonies in the cosmos and the soul 4. Integration of the rational and the spiritual

It's philosophy as a scientific religious pursuit. I don't think that comes up much in philosophy 101

Re: Philosophy as a public service

#69

Post by jeliotj » Thu, Jan 02, 2020, 10:32 PM UTC

finaliteration wrote: post #13

jeliotj wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It begs the question of what philosophy is. If it is "love of wisdom", as the Ancient Greeks suggested, then it seeks to know all things. That is, it seeks knowledge of what is, not of what is most likely, which is the domain of modern science.

> begs the question I normally wouldn’t be pedantic about this but because this is a discussion about philosophy I have to point out that it doesn’t “beg the question”. “Begging the question” is an informal logical fallacy where an argument’s premises assume that its conclusion is true so it ends up being circular. I think you mean it “raises the question”.

You're correct, I appreciate you noting that.

Re: Philosophy as a public service

#70

Post by abdullahkhalids » Thu, Jan 02, 2020, 10:36 PM UTC

claudiawerner wrote: post #58

abdullahkhalids wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have never understood this thing about being asked to study old texts in Philosophy. In no other field that I have studied have people suggested that my first introduction to the field must be a book written decades ago, forget two millennia ago. If I want to study physics, nobody tells me to read Newton or Einstein's paper. Instead I should read an introductory textbook, whose contents and presentation are much be…

>In no other field that I have studied have people suggested that my first introduction to the field must be a book written decades ago, forget two millennia ago. No other field is philosophy. Philosophy, in some respects, is special - at least according to Socrates as relayed by Plato. As Socrates says, each science (or even activity) has its object, but what of the science which has science as its object? The troub…

> What do you mean by "a better way"?

Einstein was the first person to discover relativity, and how he stated those ideas is merely one way of countless different ways of expressing them. People learned what Einstein said, taught it to others and used those ideas in further development of physics. In the process they learned ways of expressing these ideas that are much more conducive to teaching novice physicists, and/or elegant to build upon. This is what I mean by better: faster learning, deeper understanding, mathematical and conceptual elegance.

This process is not unique to physics or Einstein. In most intellectual fields, people digest and reformulate the ideas of past intellectuals to make them better, at which point people stop reading the works of those past intellectuals (except historians or the super-experts), and start referring to the newer texts. In fact, if any field does not do this, I would dare call it an anti-intellectual field.

A field has certain goals, certain questions it tries to answer. In most intellectual fields, newcomers start by learning the best possible answers to those questions found till now, and then get to the research stage, where they start trying to do better. If they do find better answers, they teach the next generation those better answers.

If you are telling me that what Plato said is among the best answers to the questions that Philosophy asks, then that means the field has not progressed. You say that "short introductions ... misses out on the intricacies of that thought", but this indicates a deep problem with Philosophy. In every other field, experts of today express the ideas of those in the past with mistakes corrected, oversights fixed, and exposition improved. You also misunderstand me when you say 'rewriting and "simplifying" texts is the hallmark of progress.' Modern textbooks of General Relativity are far more intricate, and complex than what Einstein ever wrote, yet more understandable to the physics undergrad. Our answers today are far far better than Einstein's, so I won't waste an undergrad's time with Einstein's writings.

Where are the best answers that the field of Philosophy has come up with, and why were they not written in the past few decades?