How to Do Philosophy

Unfortunately I have to agree with some ideas in this article. Long time ago I've had artificial intelligence forum, and kept it alive for two or three years, but decided to give up on it - because most of posts where exactly philofophing on theme "AI", not really useful. You cannot make a program based on those posts. Also one of comments here also suggests that "Software is applied philosophy." - I have to agree on that one as well. I've seen software source code, which were "overabstract", or over philosophical - if you could say so. Finally I've concluded that native language walks hand by hand with programming languages, and they should become one language eventually. Now I'm looking deeper into programming languages, especially C and C++, and how they are constructed, and trying to find resemblance to native language. Unfortunately trying to extract the essence/core of languages is non-trivial thing. I have hit basically the same wall as psilophy - operating on I-don't-know-what by using I-don't-know-which-terms using I-don't-know-which-logic. Also on some wiki page language definition page I have found a mention that languages in which you can express easily one thing, it's more difficult to express another thing. This basically means that exact atomic terms or definitions does not exist, and it's up to language to define them, and fluent communication is a result of language construction. So basically any language can be defined, using any terms, side effect is "how easily language can be used". Philosophy walks on shaky ground, since they try to define their own terms, concepts and logic, (or in other words their own language) after a while that newly defined language becomes completely detached from reality of this world. Or it might be even not completely detached, but not understandible by most of people, after that it still can be considered as detached.

I'm afraid of such detached situations, and so I'm trying to get highest possible abstraction of source code taking into account current programming environment / developers mental world. Each small abtraction step, which I'm achieving is one step forward - I can identify of what was done correctly and what was done wrong and take into consideration on making the next step. Unfortunately the further I go - more resistance I feel is hitting me back.

For example programming language compilers are made by whole teams, and architecture and design - even if they exists require enormous effort to develop similar compiler.

I however still think there is a way to simplify things, but it's very hard to find a better way / solution, as it is probably with philosophy. I'm inspired by language like Toki Pona, and that what drives me forward.

Thanks, your essays are excellent. I studied philosophy for the same reason you did, I thought it had something to do with finding wisdom. However, it wasn't my bread and butter option, thank heavens, otherwise I would have died of starvation by now. My own feeling is that if words break down after a certain point the next step would be the Eastern Philosophy's idea of insight into reality. Words do not really bring insight, words can only go so far in bringing insight. Words can only point in the right direction perhaps through logic and even poetry. To find the true basis of reality would be a step above words - I don't know exactly what that means - perhaps it is the sound of one hand clapping? To me philosophy is basically a way to determine reality and it forms a building block of our quest to find the true nature of reality. It is a bit sad that in our present time people do not seem interested in the fact that there are ways that reality has been studied and that our lives are often only based on escaping the reality of the moment. Last is not my idea but I read it somewhere probably in some book on Eastern Philosophy. I am convinced that the day we all start living in reality is the day that we find God. Furthermore, the upside to philosohy and the study of it is to make sure you don't make basic logical errors in your thinking for example realising that there are things such as sweeping statements, generalisations, ambiguity, prejudice, bias etc. It is often a mind strain to get through the day surrounded by people who never realise the limit that words have and the limits that untrained minds have. It is heartbreaking to realise the lost potential and the absence of meaning that is in front of peoples eyes without them ever realising it. Quite painful . . .

Thanks, your essays are excellent. I studied philosophy for the same reason you did, I thought it had something to do with finding wisdom. However, it wasn't my bread and butter option, thank heavens, otherwise I would have died of starvation by now. My own feeling is that if words break down after a certain point the next step would be the Eastern Philosophy's idea of insight into reality. Words do not really bring insight, words can only go so far in bringing insight. Words can only point in the right direction perhaps through logic and even poetry. To find the true basis of reality would be a step above words - I don't know exactly what that means - perhaps it is the sound of one hand clapping? To me philosophy is basically a way to determine reality and it forms a building block of our quest to find the true nature of reality. It is a bit sad that in our present time people do not seem interested in the fact that there are ways that reality has been studied and that our lives are often only based on escaping the reality of the moment. Last is not my idea but I read it somewhere probably in some book on Eastern Philosophy. I am convinced that the day we all start living in reality is the day that we find God. Furthermore, the upside to philosohy and the study of it is to make sure you don't make basic logical errors in your thinking for example realising that there are things such as sweeping statements, generalisations, ambiguity, prejudice, bias etc. It is often a mind strain to get through the day surrounded by people who never realise the limit that words have and the limits that untrained minds have. It is heartbreaking to realise the lost potential and the absence of meaning that is in front of peoples eyes without them ever realising it. Quite painful . . .

What you are advocating is not exactly new. Pragmatism has been around for a little over a century now.

One should not so blithely throw away the concept of science as a type of philosophy and that philosophy is a type of religion.

Natural philosophy is a very good name for science, because it reminds us that "science" is based on a philosophy. This philosophy includes the concepts of control of degrees of freedom, replication of process and result as the axiom for "proof", and objectivity, among other things.

As an example, math is not science, it is a sub-class of philosophy. It is important to realize that the math used in science is fully in tune with the philosophy of science, and MUST BE in order to be a valid tool in scientific inquiry.

Philosophy, properly done, is a way of helping both group and differentiate (to classify) things. A fundamental difference, for example, is between the constructed experiential (such as a belief), and something that is physical and non-experiential (the atomic weight of iron). This difference, properly understood, is one of the beneficial results of studying philosophy, and it HAS changed the world.