What Is Philosophy? A survey of some answers • Hacker News Board

Re: What Is Philosophy? A survey of some answers

#21

Post by unabst » Sat, Oct 17, 2020, 7:19 AM UTC

posterboy wrote: post #13

scoofy wrote: post #4

As a philosophy major with multiple degrees, this is a very strange thing to read. I was raised by a highly religious family, and was always confused by why we believed what we believed. This led me to studying philosophy. I think most people don't have the deep suspicion that everything they may know might be wrong, somehow, and that the phenomena they experience may be explainable in a parallel way that better desc…

> Caring about and understanding the structure of > knowledge is philosophy. I disagree. At least, I expected the sentence to continue differently, because the study of philosophy is to a significant degree concerned with a survey of the historic development of certain traditions of thought, and ideas. But beyond that, it's only rarely about the structure of knowledge. That's predominantly done in information science…

> the study of philosophy is to a significant degree concerned with a survey of the historic development

If you surveyed the historic development, you would know that modern computer science is the product of great philosophers who solved what logic is, what information is, and what computation is. And they got it right, because you're looking at it.

> Point in case: Your comment.

What a rude and incensitive thing to say.

Re: What Is Philosophy? A survey of some answers

#22

Post by roenxi » Sat, Oct 17, 2020, 7:24 AM UTC

yamoriyamori wrote: post #8

scoofy wrote: post #4

As a philosophy major with multiple degrees, this is a very strange thing to read. I was raised by a highly religious family, and was always confused by why we believed what we believed. This led me to studying philosophy. I think most people don't have the deep suspicion that everything they may know might be wrong, somehow, and that the phenomena they experience may be explainable in a parallel way that better desc…

> I think most people don't have the deep suspicion that everything they may know might be wrong, somehow, and that the phenomena they experience may be explainable in a parallel way that better describes things I've always wondered why it's such a majority that don't have these suspicions. (It took me a long time to realize I can relate to these 'skeptics' easier and eventually become better friends.) And to drill d…

> I've always wondered why it's such a majority that don't have these suspicions.

Because being philosophically correct (or even philosophically consistent) offers a very small material advantage. Or sometimes a disadvantage - if the environment shifts so that individuals do very badly then questioning the local collective (historically, often a church) might end poorly.

Re: What Is Philosophy? A survey of some answers

#23

Post by unabst » Sat, Oct 17, 2020, 7:30 AM UTC

scoofy wrote: post #4

As a philosophy major with multiple degrees, this is a very strange thing to read. I was raised by a highly religious family, and was always confused by why we believed what we believed. This led me to studying philosophy. I think most people don't have the deep suspicion that everything they may know might be wrong, somehow, and that the phenomena they experience may be explainable in a parallel way that better desc…

> understanding the structure of knowledge is philosophy

I would replace knowledge with arguments. Knowledge is already "solved" in many minds and it'll be hard for philosophy to reclaim the word.

But arguments? I don't think so. No field is as deeply concerned about arguments than philosophy.

Tangible arguments are scientific arguments, which are a mere subset of philosophy. Modern philosophers have failed to market the superset.

Re: What Is Philosophy? A survey of some answers

#24

Post by posterboy » Sat, Oct 17, 2020, 7:51 AM UTC

yamoriyamori wrote: post #8

scoofy wrote: post #4

As a philosophy major with multiple degrees, this is a very strange thing to read. I was raised by a highly religious family, and was always confused by why we believed what we believed. This led me to studying philosophy. I think most people don't have the deep suspicion that everything they may know might be wrong, somehow, and that the phenomena they experience may be explainable in a parallel way that better desc…

> I think most people don't have the deep suspicion that everything they may know might be wrong, somehow, and that the phenomena they experience may be explainable in a parallel way that better describes things I've always wondered why it's such a majority that don't have these suspicions. (It took me a long time to realize I can relate to these 'skeptics' easier and eventually become better friends.) And to drill d…

> > I think most people don't have the deep suspicion that everything they may know might be wrong, somehow, and that the phenomena they experience may be explainable in a parallel way that better describes things

> I've always wondered why it's such a majority that don't have these suspicions

This is entirely pejorative.

First of all, the premisses is a contradiction in terms. If knowing with certainty is a matter of definition, then doubt about it is expressly excluded. You can go down the slippery slope and deny objectivity all together to arrive at the quote popularly attributed to Sokrates, and develop platonic ideals to finally hold it with Descartes idealizing yourself, cogito ergo sum.

Yet, we fundamentally can't know what others think and feel. If we can only take a best guess, and converse to peek and poke for improving the estimate, then that's what philosophy really means in the all daily sense, our "company philosophy" and such like. It generalizes well either way, whether anthropomorphizing the environment, or objectifying people, if we always can only project from the self onto others. And esteem is actually a good analogue to philos!

Still, a notable duality remains in my philosophy above. The point I'm trying to make is, I guess, that I will have to keep that formyself and leave yours to you, because ambivalence is a feature, and a bug.

Re: What Is Philosophy? A survey of some answers

#25

Post by posterboy » Sat, Oct 17, 2020, 8:40 AM UTC

fmoralesc wrote: post #19

posterboy wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Caring about and understanding the structure of > knowledge is philosophy. I disagree. At least, I expected the sentence to continue differently, because the study of philosophy is to a significant degree concerned with a survey of the historic development of certain traditions of thought, and ideas. But beyond that, it's only rarely about the structure of knowledge. That's predominantly done in information science…

> the study of philosophy is to a significant degree concerned with a survey of the historic development of certain traditions of thought, and ideas. Have you actually been exposed to any high-level contemporary philosophical research? While it is true that many philosophers do care about the history of ideas, this is quite often done in order to treat various philosophical questions systematically (for many philosop…

While a monotonic graph can tend to zero the area under the graph can still be infinite.

using blanket terms to be filled with meaning is a valid strategy.

With that in mind, I didn't specify that OP's claim was meaningless. I just handed back the ball. Provocation is maybe not the best discurs strategy (and provocation is maybe not the most precise term for it), but it worked out well for me.

Your response gave me something to think about. Alas, I won't be able to summarize it. I can only sum up that I am not going to indulge in an argument about who and what should be considered "high-level contemporary research". If that is the main concern of your comment, you are just making my point.

More over, if philosophy is eventually a blanket term that is continuously redefined, then I tried to take as much out of it as possible by marking CS and maths as a huge contrast, however not disjunct (nor independent, authark) fields, which should leave huge room for interpretation that is topical to this venue, as a counterforce to the popular view that sees all humanities emerging from the tradition of philosophy--conversely: e.g., the meme of all link trials in Wikipedia ending at the philosophy article--equivalently: philosophy subsuming all... which is a grandious claim. High-level in that sense would be philosophy of philosophy, perhaps, for which there is no authority that I'm aware of.

It's an interesting topic indeed, but in critique of OP's remark about held believes I was trying to get at something slightly different (hoping that it aligns eventually). Namely that truth is often enough that which doesn't need saying, which is however indistinguishable from void. Everything else is climbing towers of abstractions.

I'm a C-Programmer.

    return

Re: What Is Philosophy? A survey of some answers

#26

Post by yamrzou » Sat, Oct 17, 2020, 8:45 AM UTC

scoofy wrote: post #4

As a philosophy major with multiple degrees, this is a very strange thing to read. I was raised by a highly religious family, and was always confused by why we believed what we believed. This led me to studying philosophy. I think most people don't have the deep suspicion that everything they may know might be wrong, somehow, and that the phenomena they experience may be explainable in a parallel way that better desc…

I used to spend my time on https://philosophy.stackexchange.com/ looking for.. answers. Until I read "Philosophical Investigations" and "On Certainty" by Ludwig Wittgenstein. They depict the nature of language and the nature of doubt, and allowed me to frame philosophical questions differently, from language perspective and a psychological one.

"It is not our aim to refine or complete the system of rules for the use of our words in unheard-of ways. For the clarity that we are aiming at is indeed complete clarity. But this simply means that the philosophical problems should completely disappear. The real discovery is the one that makes me capable of stopping doing philosophy when I want to." — Philosophical Investigations.

Re: What Is Philosophy? A survey of some answers

#27

Post by posterboy » Sat, Oct 17, 2020, 8:47 AM UTC

unabst wrote: post #21

posterboy wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Caring about and understanding the structure of > knowledge is philosophy. I disagree. At least, I expected the sentence to continue differently, because the study of philosophy is to a significant degree concerned with a survey of the historic development of certain traditions of thought, and ideas. But beyond that, it's only rarely about the structure of knowledge. That's predominantly done in information science…

> the study of philosophy is to a significant degree concerned with a survey of the historic development If you surveyed the historic development, you would know that modern computer science is the product of great philosophers who solved what logic is, what information is, and what computation is. And they got it right, because you're looking at it. > Point in case: Your comment. What a rude and incensitive thing to…

I'm well aware of the Crizis in Foundations and personally I have not found a satisfying solution (pun not intended).

Maybe I'm rather criticizing CS for not paying it enough head? No, I'm pretty sure I'm disappointed with philosophy for all the quantum mumbo jumbo--which is just lip service from me, as I'm just not well read in the area, but still, it's leaking into this domain and frequently criticized for it.

Re: What Is Philosophy? A survey of some answers

#28

Post by 082349872349872 » Sat, Oct 17, 2020, 1:41 PM UTC

082349872349872 wrote: post #17

rhizome wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's kind of funny how philosophy is the only topic that gets this kind of analysis. What is the purpose of music? Perhaps most famously (after philosophy): what is the purpose of astronomy?

“Tiger got to hunt, bird got to fly; Man got to sit and wonder 'why, why, why?' Tiger got to sleep, bird got to land; Man got to tell himself he understand.”

Also, https://existentialcomics.com/comic/362

Re: What Is Philosophy? A survey of some answers

#29

Post by scoofy » Sat, Oct 17, 2020, 4:13 PM UTC

unabst wrote: post #23

scoofy wrote: post #4

As a philosophy major with multiple degrees, this is a very strange thing to read. I was raised by a highly religious family, and was always confused by why we believed what we believed. This led me to studying philosophy. I think most people don't have the deep suspicion that everything they may know might be wrong, somehow, and that the phenomena they experience may be explainable in a parallel way that better desc…

> understanding the structure of knowledge is philosophy I would replace knowledge with arguments. Knowledge is already "solved" in many minds and it'll be hard for philosophy to reclaim the word. But arguments? I don't think so. No field is as deeply concerned about arguments than philosophy. Tangible arguments are scientific arguments, which are a mere subset of philosophy. Modern philosophers have failed to market…

I wasn't trying to be precise. I use knowledge in the sense of proposition. The interplay between deductive knowledge/frameworks, and inductive. I problem of that relationship is the core of why many of our mappings from the world to the framework of the world are so difficult.

Re: What Is Philosophy? A survey of some answers

#30

Post by aitchnyu » Sun, Oct 18, 2020, 1:52 PM UTC

waterheater wrote: post #7

"Of all men only those who find time for philosophy are at leisure, only they are truly alive; for it is not only their own lifetime they guard well; they add every age to their own; all the years that have passed before them they requisition for their store." - Seneca

Is there a modern "school" of philosophy that teaches people how to live? Stoicism, Seneca's school, taught people to value Good over health, wealth and pleasure. He, Marcus, Cato took up hardship instead of pleasure as philosophers.