Live data from Hacker News

"Are We Automata?" by William James (1879)

psychclassics.yorku.ca

111–112 of 112 posts

Re: "Are We Automata?" by William James (1879)

#111
post #108
post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Richard Feynman also did not see value in philosophy, and he was right. Do you realize that physics requires the adoption of a philosophy? Physics addresses problems that are effectively easy. Physicists have tools, such as mathematics, at their disposal and can make wildly simplifying assumptions. Philosophers are often trying to address what the questions even are and then try to develop new tools to both explore…

Unfortunately it is not possible to find out new questions or develop new tools by just thinking about stuff. You need to also do something concrete, at which point you cease to be just a philosopher and become also a mathematician, physicist, historian, economist etc. In the example of question of consciousness, the point of view presented by William James here was obvious to people long before him. Scientific obser…

> You need to also do something concrete, at which point you cease to be just a philosopher and become also a mathematician, physicist, historian, economist etc.

That's the point. And the converse is true as well.

Re: "Are We Automata?" by William James (1879)

#112
post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find it fascinating that "STEM people" think all problems are best solved with logic and rhetoric instead of intuition and anecdotal evidence. While in real life many things simply cannot be measured and we must act on hunches or "feelings" and many, many people are very successful in navigating the world without any education in the (powerful, but very narrow) tools of formal logic, rhetoric and axiomatic thinking…

If intuition and hunches are important as you say, why study humanities? We can just wing it, if we don’t care about things like absolute truth or sticking to something logical.

You are making a charicature of what I am saying. But to answer your question: Because quality thoughts are collected in the works that the humanities study. To say that you can and will have these quality thoughts by yourself - by winging it - is quite arrogant.

There are many works that find new ideas or are really thorough, combing through the breadth of human experience.

It is useful for people to spend their lives analysing these concepts and ideas. Their discourse can then be synthesized into new thoughts that will shape our societies. Do you think the laws you live by, the governmental structures, the way people treat each other, the structures of our societies would be like this without the studies of the humanities?

Post reply on HN