Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Plato at the Googleplex: Why Philosophy Won't Go Away

3-16am.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 154 posts

Re: Plato at the Googleplex: Why Philosophy Won't Go Away

#11

Post by keiferski »

thatcat wrote: post #9
keiferski wrote: post #2

Philosophy hasn’t stopped being relevant, if anything, it’s even more relevant today in a hyper-globalized world. What’s changed is that academics have become over-specialized, to the point where many outright deny the usefulness of entire academic fields. Scientists like Einstein or Humboldt were well versed in philosophy and religion, whereas today the “public intellectuals” often say philosophy is outdated or usel…

Mark Fisher describes the same thing, as not "the end of history" but the cancellation of the future based on observations that the Neoliberal political system has continued well past its serviceable life and that there seems to be nothing coming to replace it.

I've noticed this a lot with culture, particularly with television. At the moment, there seem to be an infinite number of shows that rehash the 1920s and the 1980s, as if we just jumped back a century, with 1920 being the present and 1980 being the future.

Re: Plato at the Googleplex: Why Philosophy Won't Go Away

#12

Post by kfichter »

thatcat wrote: post #9
keiferski wrote: post #2

Philosophy hasn’t stopped being relevant, if anything, it’s even more relevant today in a hyper-globalized world. What’s changed is that academics have become over-specialized, to the point where many outright deny the usefulness of entire academic fields. Scientists like Einstein or Humboldt were well versed in philosophy and religion, whereas today the “public intellectuals” often say philosophy is outdated or usel…

Mark Fisher describes the same thing, as not "the end of history" but the cancellation of the future based on observations that the Neoliberal political system has continued well past its serviceable life and that there seems to be nothing coming to replace it.

And the observation clearly placed a great weight on Fisher, Rest In Peace. Capitalist Realism is short, but very heavy. I highly recommend it to the HN community.

Re: Plato at the Googleplex: Why Philosophy Won't Go Away

#13

Post by peterwwillis »

Meanwhile, you mention ethical philosophy in the context of a mail security extension and get downvoted to hell. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25119305

Philosophy is doing a bad job of explaining its importance to the world. Philosophy nerds care about it, but everyone else thinks it's stupid.

Re: Plato at the Googleplex: Why Philosophy Won't Go Away

#14

Post by keiferski »

randlet wrote: post #10
ARandomerDude wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed. Everyone already has a philosophy (and a religion), though many people don't know it, and some would deny it. The question isn't whether to have a philosophy but which philosophy to have. EDIT: since some have asked what I meant by "everyone already has...a religion," I meant that even something like atheism is a religion. It has a story of the origin of the universe, various accounts for why and how you shou…

As someone who would deny having a religion, can you clarify what you mean by that?

Not the commenter you replied to, but I recommend the book A Secular Age by Charles Taylor as an 874-page answer to your question. The short version: modern secularity is really more like a new development, where new influences interact in a (still essentially) Christian, Western context, and not a mere subtraction of previous religious attitudes.

Really fascinating book, I can't recommend it enough.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Secular_Age

Re: Plato at the Googleplex: Why Philosophy Won't Go Away

#15

Post by shoreofwonder »

randlet wrote: post #10
ARandomerDude wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed. Everyone already has a philosophy (and a religion), though many people don't know it, and some would deny it. The question isn't whether to have a philosophy but which philosophy to have. EDIT: since some have asked what I meant by "everyone already has...a religion," I meant that even something like atheism is a religion. It has a story of the origin of the universe, various accounts for why and how you shou…

As someone who would deny having a religion, can you clarify what you mean by that?

Every decision you make is made under a great deal of uncertainty. A person typically holds overarching beliefs that govern those decisions.

For example, how much value do you put into close relationships versus distant ones? Is charity worthwhile if it helps someone who can't help you back? Maybe someone who doesn't even know you?

Re: Plato at the Googleplex: Why Philosophy Won't Go Away

#16

Post by ashika »

if someone is looking for a book where ancient philosophical ideas are critically applied to modern institutions and ideas, look elsewhere. this appears to be aimed at undergrad teaching, perhaps for an intro course, but despite the promising title, a quick read leaves me underwhelmed.

the main premise, forcing plato to engage with the modern world a la bill and ted, doesnt have to be bad. but this dramatization comes off quite patronizingly fellowkids. but if your students want to read about drunk people you can stick to the ancient texts! honestly, plato is one of the most accessible philosophers out there so this strikes me as doubly useless.

additionally, woe to the person looking for meaningful engagement with ethical topics where philosophical tools are actually used to answer modern questions. Here's a spot where a topic comes up, but then is lost in the banality of the author's stupid device.

> “So you’re telling me that the purpose of all this knowledge is merely to make money? Greed is driving the great search engine for knowledge? This bewilders me more than anything else I’ve gathered about this place. How can those who possess all knowledge, which must include knowledge of the life that is worth living, be interested in using knowledge only for the insignificant aim of making money? Well, what do you do when you’re faced with monumental cluelessness of this sort? Plato, I said, I think you have a somewhat exalted view of Google and the nerds who work here. Nerds? he said. Another word I do not know.”

it goes on to explain what a nerd is but never revisits the question of google's business model! the book leaves the reader at the end with a hotdog of chopped up, edited, and overly seasoned ancient philosophical ideas. i bet in high enough doses it causes cancer.

tl;dr - patronizing, zero actual engagement with technology ethics questions

Re: Plato at the Googleplex: Why Philosophy Won't Go Away

#17

Post by randlet »

shoreofwonder wrote: post #15
randlet wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As someone who would deny having a religion, can you clarify what you mean by that?

Every decision you make is made under a great deal of uncertainty. A person typically holds overarching beliefs that govern those decisions. For example, how much value do you put into close relationships versus distant ones? Is charity worthwhile if it helps someone who can't help you back? Maybe someone who doesn't even know you?

How does that imply I have a religion? Doesn't religion have some element of the supernatural by definition?

edit: reworded.

Re: Plato at the Googleplex: Why Philosophy Won't Go Away

#18

Post by randlet »

keiferski wrote: post #14
randlet wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As someone who would deny having a religion, can you clarify what you mean by that?

Not the commenter you replied to, but I recommend the book A Secular Age by Charles Taylor as an 874-page answer to your question. The short version: modern secularity is really more like a new development, where new influences interact in a (still essentially) Christian, Western context, and not a mere subtraction of previous religious attitudes. Really fascinating book, I can't recommend it enough. https://en.wikip…

It's still not clear to me how that implies I have a religion. Being influenced, consciously or subconsciously does not mean I have a religion, but maybe I'm misunderstanding your point.

Re: Plato at the Googleplex: Why Philosophy Won't Go Away

#19

Post by ko27 »

shoreofwonder wrote: post #15
randlet wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As someone who would deny having a religion, can you clarify what you mean by that?

Every decision you make is made under a great deal of uncertainty. A person typically holds overarching beliefs that govern those decisions. For example, how much value do you put into close relationships versus distant ones? Is charity worthwhile if it helps someone who can't help you back? Maybe someone who doesn't even know you?

So you are saying that you need some sort of personal gain (ticket to an utopian afterlife for example) to be a nice person?

Re: Plato at the Googleplex: Why Philosophy Won't Go Away

#20

Post by mannykannot »

keiferski wrote: post #14
randlet wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As someone who would deny having a religion, can you clarify what you mean by that?

Not the commenter you replied to, but I recommend the book A Secular Age by Charles Taylor as an 874-page answer to your question. The short version: modern secularity is really more like a new development, where new influences interact in a (still essentially) Christian, Western context, and not a mere subtraction of previous religious attitudes. Really fascinating book, I can't recommend it enough. https://en.wikip…

Secular humanisn owes a lot to ethical principles developed in a religious context, but it does not follow that by adopting the ethics, one is also adopting the religion. Any attempt to push that proposition consistently is likely to devalue the overtly theistic aspects of the religion in question.
Post reply on HN