New Forum for Philosophy of Science?
- Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
- The admin formerly known as Scott
- Posts: 5786
- Joined: January 20th, 2007, 6:24 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
- Contact:
New Forum for Philosophy of Science?
The poll will be open for 2 weeks.
For more information or to ask questions about this proposal, please see the thread about it.
Thanks,
Scott
"The mind is a wonderful servant but a terrible master."
I believe spiritual freedom (a.k.a. self-discipline) manifests as bravery, confidence, grace, honesty, love, and inner peace.
- wanabe
- Posts: 3377
- Joined: November 24th, 2008, 5:12 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Gandhi.
- Location: UBIQUITY
- Contact:
More over it would allow things that people want to keep material, from turning in to metaphysics; which is what ends up happening as things presently are.
-
- Posts: 499
- Joined: July 8th, 2009, 4:36 pm
- Location: meaningless concept
I think that epistemology & metaphysics fully-embraces any considerations of science, and that particular forum is hardly over-stretched.
Furthermore, I don't think it's right to compare a philosophy of religion with a philosophy of science, because revealed theology cannot be embraced within epistemology or metaphysics.
- wanabe
- Posts: 3377
- Joined: November 24th, 2008, 5:12 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Gandhi.
- Location: UBIQUITY
- Contact:
I mean if you look at the number of topics in E/M you will see it's the second highest, only to the general philosophy forum (yes, the race is fairly close for second).
More over you can apply metaphysics and epistemology to anything.
The drink can't be too diluted because it is made up of everything!
The philosophy of science section would be purely about physical science, and segregate from the discussion; possibilities. Only discussions involving physical evidence would be valid.
Science and religion have been at "war" since science's conception! Again it is only fair to have a science section if there is a religion section.
-
- Posts: 499
- Joined: July 8th, 2009, 4:36 pm
- Location: meaningless concept
I know that, but that's hardly a consideration because this forum is relatively quiet, on the whole. For instance, it's nearly 5pm where I am, and only 3 threads have produced posts today in the E/M forum. And it's like that most days, from what I can tell.wanabe wrote:I can't disagree more lifegazer.
I mean if you look at the number of topics in E/M you will see it's the second highest, only to the general philosophy forum (yes, the race is fairly close for second).
If there's going to be new forums created, there should really be a better reason, imo.
I'm not sure about that. Would you care to discuss it, over at E & M?More over you can apply metaphysics and epistemology to anything.
Certainly, I don't think that politics is relevant to metaphysics. And what can be known about politics? The question hardly seems to make sense.
Likewise, there are areas of [revealed] religion that are beyond epistemology. Certainly, many issues pertaining to religion, such as whether Jesus existed, cannot be decided by philosophy at all. Certainly, whether God exists is a metaphysical issue. Whether the Xian God is that God, is a matter that cannot be discussed purely from the point-of-view of philosophy - especially if you are a Xian yourself. And what of 'art' (another contender for a forum of its own)? Certainly, E & M is not the place for it.
But that's not philosophy; it's just science. And although most people here have an interest in science, this forum as a whole specialises in philosophy. So, if we're going to have a science forum, why not a sports forum, or a stamp collector's forum?The philosophy of science section would be purely about physical science, and segregate from the discussion; possibilities. Only discussions involving physical evidence would be valid.
- wanabe
- Posts: 3377
- Joined: November 24th, 2008, 5:12 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Gandhi.
- Location: UBIQUITY
- Contact:
More over it can't be that hard to make a new section, it's mostly copy and paste work.
The more ways/perspectives we present information the better. I would be in full support of any new forum(even if they are as trivial as stamps and sports. Knowledge can be gained form anything and the more different ways and angles the information has the deeper the understanding).
What can be known about politics/religion; everything any nothing... If we stop questing/thinking (critically), no matter what we are calling it, we are shooting ourselves in the foot.
Making a new forum is not spiting the red sea or turning water in to wine.
-
- Posts: 499
- Joined: July 8th, 2009, 4:36 pm
- Location: meaningless concept
No demands, especially small ones, should automatically be granted.wanabe wrote:Bottom line, people are asking for it. There is a demand no mater how small to have two new forums crated. One for art and one for science.
The effort required is not the issue.More over it can't be that hard to make a new section, it's mostly copy and paste work.
Let's have as many forums as we can think of, then. Thousands of them. Let's dilute M & E out of existence. Yes, let's have a philosophy board with a disused M & E forum.The more ways/perspectives we present information the better. I would be in full support of any new forum(even if they are as trivial as stamps and sports. Knowledge can be gained form anything and the more different ways and angles the information has the deeper the understanding).
If you owned Buckingham Palace and invited 50 people over for a party, would you open all of the rooms to them, or concentrate them into one room?
What's at stake here, is the M & E forum. The heart and soul of philosophy. A philosophy forum with a poor M & E forum, is not an attractive philosophy forum, imo.Making a new forum is not spiting the red sea or turning water in to wine.
The 'traffic' doesn't warrant the change that has been requested. But the significant point here, is that the philosophy of science is the pivotal focus of epistemology. Even I, an idealist with a metaphysical agenda, spend half of my time discussing the limits of science. Why? Because so many people think that science defines the limits of what can be known.
If 'science' is segregated from all other M & E considerations, it will in some sense be at the expense of all other M & E considerations. It will, to some extent, exempt science from addressing those considerations. Especially if you get your way and ONLY 'physical facts' are allowed to be aired.
This may not sound that important to you, but to anyone that has a passion for metaphysics and epistemology, it's an abberation of philosophy.
That's why I've made the effort to post here.
Plus, I think it would be a backward-step for the forum as a whole, to make. I like it here, and wouldn't want to see that happen.
- wanabe
- Posts: 3377
- Joined: November 24th, 2008, 5:12 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Gandhi.
- Location: UBIQUITY
- Contact:
Effort required is always an issue, there is never just one issue!
Your fear mongering is ridiculous, were not going to eradicate E/M by having a science and art forum.
People are not just going to ask for pointless philosophy forums like stamps, there is no demand for it.
Its not like it cant be undone if things **some how take a turn for the worst.
I have lots of posts in the e/m section (I post more there than anywhere). I too have a passion for it, but its own limitations; as in we can't (debatable) know any thing; makes for convoluted discussions for some, and the practicality of science is not getting its proper address.
E/m is critical part of philosophy it can't be replaced or diluted, otherwise it would have been long ago. More over you cant dilute philosophy with more philosophy. And if we can: that poor general philosophy forum; we better stop diluting it with all these random off shoots like religion and interviews.
There will be no step if we don't make new forums and change things. Backwards or forwards steps; we still learn.
Again, its not like it can't be undone if things **some how take a turn for the worst.
-
- Posts: 597
- Joined: September 5th, 2007, 4:25 am
- Contact:
-
- Posts: 597
- Joined: September 5th, 2007, 4:25 am
- Contact:
- wanabe
- Posts: 3377
- Joined: November 24th, 2008, 5:12 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Gandhi.
- Location: UBIQUITY
- Contact:
If you think there cant be a lot of discussion with just science talk perhaps you should read some scientific journals/abstracts. Or my bumped post on evolution(this goes for every one).
I guess the votes, and scott (mostly) will decide.
-
- Posts: 597
- Joined: September 5th, 2007, 4:25 am
- Contact:
This doesn't make science philosophy though. The areas of science which can be discussed philosophically seem to be more limited than what you're suggesting, which would in effect be a "Science Subforum" of a philosophy website.
- wanabe
- Posts: 3377
- Joined: November 24th, 2008, 5:12 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Gandhi.
- Location: UBIQUITY
- Contact:
It's not fair for you to make any conclusions about how easily science can be discussed philosophically if you have never tried it. Nor bare to take an interest in scientific journals.
I don't like the politics section too much but i don't knock it.
To prove my point, ill replace science with religion....a religious sub forum of a philosophy web site...There isn't much to be said about religion, its all right there in a book, god said so, end of discussion.....right.....come on.
- wanabe
- Posts: 3377
- Joined: November 24th, 2008, 5:12 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Gandhi.
- Location: UBIQUITY
- Contact:
-
- Posts: 597
- Joined: September 5th, 2007, 4:25 am
- Contact:
Religious pronouncements, doctrines and denominations have different fundamental standpoints, so there's more fundamental variation, and the ethics of religion is different from the ethics of science because the ethic of the religion feeds back directly into our conception of God and so remains theologically relevant in a way that the ethics of science is not so scientifically relevant, and is usually discussed under Ethics.
2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month
Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023
Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023