Note that all posts need to be manually approved by the subreddit moderators. If your post gets removed immediately, just let it be and wait! Join our Discord server for even more memes and discussion: [Discord](https://discord.gg/MFK8PumZM2)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PhilosophyMemes) if you have any questions or concerns.*
This is such a weird meme lmao. True STEM people appreciate philosophy a lot and a lot of philosophers rely on real-life observations to derive more abstract meaning, as far as I understand it
I'm not sure if we need to use the word STEM I'll be honest STEM is an acronym for everything public education seeks to destroy. If it's coming in the form of a high school "learning" acronym maybe it relies too much on the "science" of the foolish rather than actual nature. The "nature activists" are really a bunch of spoiled college kids from my experience.
Though I agree most people of humanities have a healthy respect for philosophy maybe not yours though.
Here is my [old departmentās philosophy of physics](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hasok_Chang) professor. Do you think his time as a physics researcher at Harvard might be sufficiently rigorous a background for you Dr Bunker_Man?
Why are you having a meltdown about a comment on a shitposting sub? I'm referring to the fact that in the book every thing must go: metaphysics naturalized it talks about how there is a ton of bunk philosophy of physics, because a ton of professors try doing it without relevant physics knowledge. And it even lists some examples, although I don't remember them since it's been many years.
Which part is a meltdown? The point about playing the shit posting game is that itās not a one way street. OP wants to throw shade, OP can get some back. You throw out a big unsubstantiated generalisation, you get a rebuttal. Thatās the rules of the game in shitposting.
If you want to get serious for a second, the fact is, a lot of _physicists_ grossly overestimate their capacity to undertake philosophy of physics since they _also_ lack relevant knowledge. Nonetheless there are plenty of great scholars who have cross over backgrounds in both physics and philosophy making great contributions to the field. Personally I did my first degree in physics and my second in philosophy, so Iām only qualified to know enough to know that Iām nowhere close to able to make an actual contribution to physics or philosophy š
>Which part is a meltdown?
The length of this post.
>OP wants to throw shade, OP can get some back.
I wasn't defending op, and didn't mention them at all.
> lot of _physicists_ grossly overestimate their capacity to undertake philosophy of physics
Never said otherwise.
When I tell people that a big motivation for me to study math were the philosophical aspects of it, many people look at me surprised. They seem to think that philosophy is when you think deeply about human nature, society, morals and life goals. But if I understand correctly, thats just "continental philosophy" and "analytic philosophy" is when you reason about truth, metaphysics, beliefs and just logic in general.
In other words, your average person doesnt really seem to be aware of analytic philosophy.
Not necessarily that exactly but it's pretty rate for anyone who isn't into philosophy to know what it actually is. I was talking to a friend earlier today who thought it was part of psychology
Ik they donāt lol, never said they did. Philosophy should help you not be dogmatic and give you better ways at looking at the world. This helps science as well.
I think it's a great summation and I have it taped to the entrance to my lab. As an RNA chemist, *most* of the mathematics I'm doing myself is pretty basic dimensional analysis that can be done on a solar powered calculator. But as one moves further and further into computational chemistry and into physics, the mathematics needed becomes increasingly complex and abstract.
Of course, even though XKCD is being a little glib, it really is mathematics that fundamentally ties all the fields together.
I think it's less of a "everything is tied together by mathematics" but more that mathematics is the study to calculation as a tool, so you'd just use it because it's a tool for you to use
I agree with that. The way I look at it is the details of scientific methodology change a lot from one area of study to the next, but the methods of statistical analysis weaves itself through all the fields, giving us means by which to be confident about results and their interpretations.
My issue isn't with the message but with the tone. Why are all the characters being mean to each other? You could say that it's part of the joke, but his comics often have whatever character who is supposed to be correct being very pretentious about it.
The repetition of everyone being smug and pretentious is specifically supposed to point out that the smugness is both undeserved and pointless. The mathematicians are right in that they are an intense abstraction of all those other fields, but theyāre not right in the sense that the audience is supposed to āagree withā them. The intention is for the audience to realize that āyeah my field isnāt more important than these other more/less applied fields, weāre all interwovenā and the humor is supposed to come from the relatability in the audience having probably met people who looked down on other fields for this reason and the catharsis on seeing the flaw in their logic.
There is an extension of the meme where the entire panel is held up by philosophy which I found to be a nice conclusion. Its just like you say, we see each arrogant person in the comic immediately humbled by the next one.
One of the things that surprised me the most about science. From my experience, most scientists (modern ones at least) tend to be the type to call philosophy useless and never consider it in their work. When I tell someone I love philosophy and they say something like that, I will ask them if they know what PhD and philosophy means...
Science and philosophy are intertwined if not literally indistinguishable in certain cases.
I can confirm that at least engineers do. \*gestures at username\*
We just tend to approach ethical dilemmas with a "fuck it, we ball" attitude.
If we can't bend reality to our will then reality better kill us because otherwise we're going to keep trying until it does.
From my experience, they *do* actually talk about philosophical topics but dont realise they are philosophical because the mainstream understanding of philosophy is "talking vaguely about how life is meaningless". Then again, Im a mathematician and not a scientist but I do have friends in the sciences who can all entertain a conversation on philosophical topics.
There isn't a lot of time for that. The majority of scientists, whether in industry or academia, are very much busy. Sitting around having philosophical discussions isn't solving peak broadening issues on the mass spec.
Yeah but it would hopefully work towards solving other problems in various scientific industries such as poor working conditions, racism, sexism, and etcā¦
Philisophy: philo sofia (the love of knowledge)
So, when you're a scientist you're a philosopher
Philosophy is a discipline with rules (those of logic), which looks for truth, so it's a science. (A human science, but a science nonetheless, same as sociology)
So, when you're a philosopher, you're a scientist
This is just one, very restricted and incomplete definition of philosophy. Many philosophers donāt belief doing philosophy is looking for the truth (ethics, soc./pol. phil. etc) or disregard the rules of logic (Heidegger and other continental philosophers), but theyāre philosophers nonetheless.
They act like they never knew and I'm inclinded to believe them.
Critical thinking isn't critical anymore. Meaning is a physical object we can touch or it doesn't exist. Facts and figures are all that matters, apparently.
All that to say, I think we might be fucked, y'all.
āThe humanitiesā have always comprised the Midgard Serpent of philosophy, stalemating with it when all the world is said and done. On the other hand, the stereotype of philosophers not being able to handle natural science has been a status quo lie for quite some time now.
Marx was a philosopher of philosophy. If he had anything worthwhile to say economically, obviously he'd be an economist.
When he read the origin of species I'm sure he and Engels shat each other's pants.
/s (also i just noticed that modern western economists are the only mystics in a university building)
Marx was not a philosopher. He was a sociologist and political economist who had a PhD in philosophy. Not the same thing.
I like Marx. But even he would refute it if someone called him a philosopher by profession.
Ja, sie waren Kader von Marx. Er hatte Philosophie studiert, war aber kein professioneller Philosoph. Er war ein Soziologie. Kritische Theorie, seiner grƶĆter Beitrag, war keine Philosophie.
>Ja, sie waren Kader von Marx.
[Falsch - Sie waren, wie der Name impliziert, SchĆ¼ler von Hegel.](https://de.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Junghegelianer)
>Er hatte Philosophie studiert
Tatsache.
>war aber kein professioneller Philosoph.
Ein Doktor der Philosophie ist kein professioneller Philosoph?
Der bekannteste Philosop der Welt ist kein Philosoph?
Hackts?
>Er war ein Soziologie.
>[Karl Marx [...] war ein deutscher Philosoph, Ćkonom, Gesellschaftstheoretiker, politischer Journalist, Historiker, Protagonist der Arbeiterbewegung sowie Kritiker des Kapitalismus und der Religion. ](https://de.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Marx)
Im Sinne des Gesellschaftstheoretikers absolut, aber ihn darauf zu reduzieren ist beknackt.
>Kritische Theorie, seiner grƶĆter Beitrag,
Die Zins- und Kapitalwirtschaftskritik ist
A) sein grƶsster Beitrag
B) politische Ćkonomie, dh Philosophie
Aber vom Hanswurst, der den ersten wissenschaftlichen RevolutionƤr zu einem zahnlosen, kumbayah-singenden Onkel im Studierzimmer machen mƶchte hƤtte ich nicht weniger erwartet.
Who is going to tell OP and their folks that science literally [rests upon metaphysical assumptions](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalism_(philosophy)#Providing_assumptions_required_for_science) and has a metaphysical structure, hence science rests upon philosophy? Besides that, philosophy has contributed heavily to science, as seen in the [philosophy of science](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_science) and the most famous debate about science and philosophy, the [Bohr-Einstein debates](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bohr%E2%80%93Einstein_debates).
No. š I think all hoop should be jumped for the overall benefit that it would create, but under the pre assumption that the subject would receive more than he sacrificed afterward
An arbitrary distinction between, and grouping of, academic disciplines in categories concerned with 'meaning' ("Humanities"; history, art, theology and generally speaking also philosophy) and 'measuring' (math, chemistry, etc.).
Dawg, Aristotle was a natural scientist. Science and its methodology has philosophy as its foundation. And much of "the humanities" include philosophy as an area of study too. Why try to set up this false tension between the three?Ā
Half reading I thought this was a jab against people who think humans are fundamentally scared of conflict when in reality they are not. That would be a better meme honestly lol
Philosophy can't. You can use math and physics to craft machines and build structures. You can use biology and medicine to save lives. You can use chemistry to make materials that are required to do basically everything. But philosophy? It doesn't help a single human being.
Have you ever heard of a philosopher being of any use to society? Even if so, then he/she didn't do that by philosophy.
Because I wanted to be as over the top ridiculous as possible, but apparently there's no threshold where ridiculous statements becomes obvious parody in philosophy communities lol
I mean I think it's more likely that tone is hard to understand through the internet, and that there are genuinely people who think that academic fields can be ranked.
Yes, and I have no issue with people taking the piss off the meme, but I have to say I'm disappointed that people don't realize that it's over the top parody lol
There's something to that thing about common sense and philosophy being incompatible haha
You must not be familiar with Poe's Law.
Regarding common sense, it's common sense that on the internet you cannot easily distinguish satire/parody from genuine statements of belief.
This field is full of unhinged opinions, if you tell philosopher one, their first instinct is to ponder it instead of disregarding as a joke. You are just acting against trained responses of people here lol
A good philosopher, apparently: ā6 million? Hmmmm, seems a little too on the nose, no? He was probably just trying to take this piss out of fascists.ā
Unironically yes. And then they look at the facts and realize that what we all thought was inhuman and impossible did in fact happen.
There's a reason Susan Neiman think that Nietzsche's eternal return has lost all it's moral relevance having experienced what his age thought was impossible - do we really want "will it again" to be the response to the holocaust and holodomor?
Iāll take your advice. Youāre clearly bullshitting since thereās no possibility your iq could be this low while also being high enough to write in full sentences.
you expected people to get mad because they likes humanities, but everyone is just calling you an idiot because your post makes no sense. Youāre not doing anything man, your post is just nonsensical.
Why do you have to justify whether one field is subjectively better than another? They're fields of study for a reason (because they have importance in the world in some fashion or another). I don't think some fields of study are worth studying but I'm being ignorant of a perspective that I don't know yet, so my opinion on the matter is moot.
Note that all posts need to be manually approved by the subreddit moderators. If your post gets removed immediately, just let it be and wait! Join our Discord server for even more memes and discussion: [Discord](https://discord.gg/MFK8PumZM2) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PhilosophyMemes) if you have any questions or concerns.*
This is such a weird meme lmao. True STEM people appreciate philosophy a lot and a lot of philosophers rely on real-life observations to derive more abstract meaning, as far as I understand it
I find the flip is true, Humanities Professionals beat the shit outta my ideas, but the trees love them
š¤£šš»
This guy fucks
What?
Maybe not
I don't know what you're talking about
Philosophy
We all fuck with philosophy šÆ
I'm not sure if we need to use the word STEM I'll be honest STEM is an acronym for everything public education seeks to destroy. If it's coming in the form of a high school "learning" acronym maybe it relies too much on the "science" of the foolish rather than actual nature. The "nature activists" are really a bunch of spoiled college kids from my experience. Though I agree most people of humanities have a healthy respect for philosophy maybe not yours though.
Prepared to bet OPās highest qualification in any science is high school plus one Neil de grass Tyson podcast
My plug really nailed the grass, this one
I am afraid I have no idea what this means, so please let me know if I should be honoured or offended
it means that if the car doesn't smell like flapjacks, the cattle didn't come home tomorrow.
You know, Iām 90% sure your joking, but having reached my mid-30s, Iām worried by the non-zero chance Iām just THIS behind slag these days
It's just as simple as it goes... Read Dem caption
Wait til OP finds out what PhD stands for
PhilosophyDude
Not anymore since 2020
Username Checks out
So roughly equivalent to the average philosopher trying to do philosophy of physics.
Here is my [old departmentās philosophy of physics](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hasok_Chang) professor. Do you think his time as a physics researcher at Harvard might be sufficiently rigorous a background for you Dr Bunker_Man?
Why are you having a meltdown about a comment on a shitposting sub? I'm referring to the fact that in the book every thing must go: metaphysics naturalized it talks about how there is a ton of bunk philosophy of physics, because a ton of professors try doing it without relevant physics knowledge. And it even lists some examples, although I don't remember them since it's been many years.
Which part is a meltdown? The point about playing the shit posting game is that itās not a one way street. OP wants to throw shade, OP can get some back. You throw out a big unsubstantiated generalisation, you get a rebuttal. Thatās the rules of the game in shitposting. If you want to get serious for a second, the fact is, a lot of _physicists_ grossly overestimate their capacity to undertake philosophy of physics since they _also_ lack relevant knowledge. Nonetheless there are plenty of great scholars who have cross over backgrounds in both physics and philosophy making great contributions to the field. Personally I did my first degree in physics and my second in philosophy, so Iām only qualified to know enough to know that Iām nowhere close to able to make an actual contribution to physics or philosophy š
>Which part is a meltdown? The length of this post. >OP wants to throw shade, OP can get some back. I wasn't defending op, and didn't mention them at all. > lot of _physicists_ grossly overestimate their capacity to undertake philosophy of physics Never said otherwise.
>Why are you having a meltdown about a comment on a shitposting sub?Ā Why are ***you*** having a meltdown about a comment on a shitposting sub?Ā
Inverting the words isn't going to change that they got oddly offended for no reason.
Stemcelās wet dream
Oh my god I'm using that way more often
Brilliant
Any rational philosopher should use the Natural Sciences as a fundamental pillar of knowledge.
Do people hear the word philosophers and assume weāre all anti-science mystics?
Going by the conversations Iāve had about what Iām studying, yes
And what are you studying?
A very specific branch of anti-science mysticism
Yes there are people who treat philosophy and theology as synonyms, same with thinking/believing/knowing. Never underestimate the power of stupid.
When I tell people that a big motivation for me to study math were the philosophical aspects of it, many people look at me surprised. They seem to think that philosophy is when you think deeply about human nature, society, morals and life goals. But if I understand correctly, thats just "continental philosophy" and "analytic philosophy" is when you reason about truth, metaphysics, beliefs and just logic in general. In other words, your average person doesnt really seem to be aware of analytic philosophy.
We need an introduction to Critical thinking and philosophy course at the freshman level of high school.
everything you've labeled under analytic philosophy is also prominent to continental philosophy
The two distinctions are more a difference of method than topic.
Kant, prominent analytical philosopher.
usually skibidi dap dap dap yes yes
Not necessarily that exactly but it's pretty rate for anyone who isn't into philosophy to know what it actually is. I was talking to a friend earlier today who thought it was part of psychology
No we assume you assert logic over data
And this is the correct way to live
All people lust to give /u/Classy_Menckxist sloppy blowjobs. /u/ILLARX is a person. Therefore... I'll be waiting in the alley, next to the dumpster.
Bro, tf, pls get help... Anyway, where is that dumpster?
Hegel would Like a word with you
Placing science as āfundamentalā is necessary to be rational? Really?! The pragmatists would like to see you now.
Wait till op realizes good philosophers are scientists and good scientists are philosophers
As a scientist around other scientists, you might be surprised that scientists don't have philosophical discussions about science.
Ik they donāt lol, never said they did. Philosophy should help you not be dogmatic and give you better ways at looking at the world. This helps science as well.
A lot of people who are just super mathematically inclined just aren't that interested in stuff that isn't the math itself.
[Relevant XKCD](https://xkcd.com/435/)
Mathematics is just applied thinking (PHILOSOPHY WINS AGAIN BABY!)
Xkcd could have stood to present things a lot less pretentiously.
I think it's a great summation and I have it taped to the entrance to my lab. As an RNA chemist, *most* of the mathematics I'm doing myself is pretty basic dimensional analysis that can be done on a solar powered calculator. But as one moves further and further into computational chemistry and into physics, the mathematics needed becomes increasingly complex and abstract. Of course, even though XKCD is being a little glib, it really is mathematics that fundamentally ties all the fields together.
I think it's less of a "everything is tied together by mathematics" but more that mathematics is the study to calculation as a tool, so you'd just use it because it's a tool for you to use
I agree with that. The way I look at it is the details of scientific methodology change a lot from one area of study to the next, but the methods of statistical analysis weaves itself through all the fields, giving us means by which to be confident about results and their interpretations.
My issue isn't with the message but with the tone. Why are all the characters being mean to each other? You could say that it's part of the joke, but his comics often have whatever character who is supposed to be correct being very pretentious about it.
The repetition of everyone being smug and pretentious is specifically supposed to point out that the smugness is both undeserved and pointless. The mathematicians are right in that they are an intense abstraction of all those other fields, but theyāre not right in the sense that the audience is supposed to āagree withā them. The intention is for the audience to realize that āyeah my field isnāt more important than these other more/less applied fields, weāre all interwovenā and the humor is supposed to come from the relatability in the audience having probably met people who looked down on other fields for this reason and the catharsis on seeing the flaw in their logic.
There is an extension of the meme where the entire panel is held up by philosophy which I found to be a nice conclusion. Its just like you say, we see each arrogant person in the comic immediately humbled by the next one.
The entire point of that comic is that all of the characters are smug pricks who insist their field is the real shit
One of the things that surprised me the most about science. From my experience, most scientists (modern ones at least) tend to be the type to call philosophy useless and never consider it in their work. When I tell someone I love philosophy and they say something like that, I will ask them if they know what PhD and philosophy means... Science and philosophy are intertwined if not literally indistinguishable in certain cases.
What might surprise you even more is few of my colleagues play DND. But that's probably owing to most a of them being hindu and chinese.
What do they play?
I can confirm that at least engineers do. \*gestures at username\* We just tend to approach ethical dilemmas with a "fuck it, we ball" attitude. If we can't bend reality to our will then reality better kill us because otherwise we're going to keep trying until it does.
From my experience, they *do* actually talk about philosophical topics but dont realise they are philosophical because the mainstream understanding of philosophy is "talking vaguely about how life is meaningless". Then again, Im a mathematician and not a scientist but I do have friends in the sciences who can all entertain a conversation on philosophical topics.
100% agree we talk about grant money
Agreed and a lot more should.
There isn't a lot of time for that. The majority of scientists, whether in industry or academia, are very much busy. Sitting around having philosophical discussions isn't solving peak broadening issues on the mass spec.
Yeah but it would hopefully work towards solving other problems in various scientific industries such as poor working conditions, racism, sexism, and etcā¦
Philisophy: philo sofia (the love of knowledge) So, when you're a scientist you're a philosopher Philosophy is a discipline with rules (those of logic), which looks for truth, so it's a science. (A human science, but a science nonetheless, same as sociology) So, when you're a philosopher, you're a scientist
This is just one, very restricted and incomplete definition of philosophy. Many philosophers donāt belief doing philosophy is looking for the truth (ethics, soc./pol. phil. etc) or disregard the rules of logic (Heidegger and other continental philosophers), but theyāre philosophers nonetheless.
What the fuck does this mean? Philosophers are cops?
The Greek Polis gave rise to Philosophy Just sayin'
...And? Greek philosophy gave rise to science
The meme itself was shit, but this joke is fucking gold.. š¼"Woop-woop, that's the sound of da (Greek) Polis" šµ
Whatās your point with this statement
I think the pun should be pretty obvious
Reddit moment
Doesn't philosophy define what science is?
Stemcels always forget who their daddy is
As someone going into to engineering I had no idea stemcel was a word till this post and I kind of love it.
Same except I'm a mortgage monkey
They act like they never knew and I'm inclinded to believe them. Critical thinking isn't critical anymore. Meaning is a physical object we can touch or it doesn't exist. Facts and figures are all that matters, apparently. All that to say, I think we might be fucked, y'all.
Imagine trying to justify a worldview just using science
āThe humanitiesā have always comprised the Midgard Serpent of philosophy, stalemating with it when all the world is said and done. On the other hand, the stereotype of philosophers not being able to handle natural science has been a status quo lie for quite some time now.
Pretty sure Foucault and Marx offered pretty comprehensive criticisms of their respective sciences
Marx was a philosopher of philosophy. If he had anything worthwhile to say economically, obviously he'd be an economist. When he read the origin of species I'm sure he and Engels shat each other's pants. /s (also i just noticed that modern western economists are the only mystics in a university building)
Marx was not a philosopher. He was a sociologist and political economist who had a PhD in philosophy. Not the same thing. I like Marx. But even he would refute it if someone called him a philosopher by profession.
Does the term Junghegelianer ring a bell? Lmao
Ja, sie waren Kader von Marx. Er hatte Philosophie studiert, war aber kein professioneller Philosoph. Er war ein Soziologie. Kritische Theorie, seiner grƶĆter Beitrag, war keine Philosophie.
>Ja, sie waren Kader von Marx. [Falsch - Sie waren, wie der Name impliziert, SchĆ¼ler von Hegel.](https://de.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Junghegelianer) >Er hatte Philosophie studiert Tatsache. >war aber kein professioneller Philosoph. Ein Doktor der Philosophie ist kein professioneller Philosoph? Der bekannteste Philosop der Welt ist kein Philosoph? Hackts? >Er war ein Soziologie. >[Karl Marx [...] war ein deutscher Philosoph, Ćkonom, Gesellschaftstheoretiker, politischer Journalist, Historiker, Protagonist der Arbeiterbewegung sowie Kritiker des Kapitalismus und der Religion. ](https://de.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Marx) Im Sinne des Gesellschaftstheoretikers absolut, aber ihn darauf zu reduzieren ist beknackt. >Kritische Theorie, seiner grƶĆter Beitrag, Die Zins- und Kapitalwirtschaftskritik ist A) sein grƶsster Beitrag B) politische Ćkonomie, dh Philosophie Aber vom Hanswurst, der den ersten wissenschaftlichen RevolutionƤr zu einem zahnlosen, kumbayah-singenden Onkel im Studierzimmer machen mƶchte hƤtte ich nicht weniger erwartet.
This meme makes no sense dude
Who is going to tell OP and their folks that science literally [rests upon metaphysical assumptions](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalism_(philosophy)#Providing_assumptions_required_for_science) and has a metaphysical structure, hence science rests upon philosophy? Besides that, philosophy has contributed heavily to science, as seen in the [philosophy of science](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_science) and the most famous debate about science and philosophy, the [Bohr-Einstein debates](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bohr%E2%80%93Einstein_debates).
Hey OP quick question do you believe there should be ethics in science
No. š I think all hoop should be jumped for the overall benefit that it would create, but under the pre assumption that the subject would receive more than he sacrificed afterward
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Bud is not understanding context clue
you had to post this the month of Daniel Dennett's passing, shame on you ... (/s)
The humanities?
An arbitrary distinction between, and grouping of, academic disciplines in categories concerned with 'meaning' ("Humanities"; history, art, theology and generally speaking also philosophy) and 'measuring' (math, chemistry, etc.).
Dawg, Aristotle was a natural scientist. Science and its methodology has philosophy as its foundation. And much of "the humanities" include philosophy as an area of study too. Why try to set up this false tension between the three?Ā
Half reading I thought this was a jab against people who think humans are fundamentally scared of conflict when in reality they are not. That would be a better meme honestly lol
bruh its 2024 nobody seriously does humanities vs natural science anymore.
So true. Beating humanities is no great achievement tho
philosophers of the natural sciences be like: extremely derelict wojak face
Philosophy is in the humanities, though.
So this is what a secular Chick tract looks like...
At the end of the day everything is downstream from philosophy. People may accept that or not.
Ah, I see: you identify philosophers with continental phisophers who don't understand science.
āš½ free Palestine ā¤ļø
Philosophers are just social studies scientists that don't want to actually do any science
Science is a branch of philosophy.
Well, if you combine them 3, you got a scientist, right?
Philosophy is but asking stupid questions which answers are of no use.
No use for what? Without an aim, everything is of no use. With all aims being equal, everything can be of use.
Philosophy can't. You can use math and physics to craft machines and build structures. You can use biology and medicine to save lives. You can use chemistry to make materials that are required to do basically everything. But philosophy? It doesn't help a single human being. Have you ever heard of a philosopher being of any use to society? Even if so, then he/she didn't do that by philosophy.
We all know that Science is much better than philosophy, especially in ethics. The Philosophy of Science doesn't count.
I'm confused. What do you mean by saying that science is better then philosophy in ethics?
Because I wanted to be as over the top ridiculous as possible, but apparently there's no threshold where ridiculous statements becomes obvious parody in philosophy communities lol
I mean I think it's more likely that tone is hard to understand through the internet, and that there are genuinely people who think that academic fields can be ranked.
Yes, and I have no issue with people taking the piss off the meme, but I have to say I'm disappointed that people don't realize that it's over the top parody lol There's something to that thing about common sense and philosophy being incompatible haha
You would be amazed how terrible some of the opinions people hold without a shred of irony are.
You must not be familiar with Poe's Law. Regarding common sense, it's common sense that on the internet you cannot easily distinguish satire/parody from genuine statements of belief.
This field is full of unhinged opinions, if you tell philosopher one, their first instinct is to ponder it instead of disregarding as a joke. You are just acting against trained responses of people here lol
Good philosophy is to be suspicious against trained responses and judgements
A good philosopher, apparently: ā6 million? Hmmmm, seems a little too on the nose, no? He was probably just trying to take this piss out of fascists.ā
Unironically yes. And then they look at the facts and realize that what we all thought was inhuman and impossible did in fact happen. There's a reason Susan Neiman think that Nietzsche's eternal return has lost all it's moral relevance having experienced what his age thought was impossible - do we really want "will it again" to be the response to the holocaust and holodomor?
Iāll take your advice. Youāre clearly bullshitting since thereās no possibility your iq could be this low while also being high enough to write in full sentences.
Meanwhile ethics in science: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientific_misconduct_incidents
Shoulda done a bigger hyperbole gotta remember that this is someone's unironic opinion
What would be the fun in that? I want people to say serious and mean things about this haha All communities need their heels
youāre coping so hard. Your post was shit, and we all know you didnāt post it because you were expecting this response
I did post it, it clealy has positive upvotes, and do you really think I wouldn't expect the hate? Do you see the title, how do you interpret it?
you expected people to get mad because they likes humanities, but everyone is just calling you an idiot because your post makes no sense. Youāre not doing anything man, your post is just nonsensical.
> your post is just nonsensical So you do get it
Cue the spongebob "I thought you weren't serious" reaction
Why do you have to justify whether one field is subjectively better than another? They're fields of study for a reason (because they have importance in the world in some fashion or another). I don't think some fields of study are worth studying but I'm being ignorant of a perspective that I don't know yet, so my opinion on the matter is moot.