Has Philosophy Lost Its Mind?

Use this forum to discuss the philosophy of science. Philosophy of science deals with the assumptions, foundations, and implications of science.
User avatar
Pattern-chaser
Premium Member
Posts: 8265
Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
Location: England

Re: Has Philosophy Lost Its Mind?

Post by Pattern-chaser »

Marvin_Edwards wrote: April 26th, 2020, 1:09 pm
Pattern-chaser wrote: April 26th, 2020, 12:16 pm

Can you think of an example of a paradox that we are (or could be) sucked into? I can't think of any. Perhaps my imagination is lacking? 🤔
All the false implications of deterministic causal necessity. The notion that causation can cause events or that determinism can determine events (reification fallacy). The notion that the laws of nature have causal agency (metaphorical thinking). The notion that inevitability excludes possibilities and choices (figurative thinking).

The impossible "philosophical" definition of free will (freedom from causal necessity is an oxymoron).

And doesn't the phrase "scientific antirealism" strike you as at least a bit paradoxical?
Before I started this reply, I checked the definition of "paradox". It describes a seeming contradiction. I had misunderstood it to mean that the contradictions are real and actual. It just shows what little confusions I still carry around, even at my age. 😊 So a paradox is a situation that seems to contain contradictions. OK.

Causation gives rise to "false implications"? I'd be interested to know what they are? In a recent discussion of causation, and whether it always applies, I noted absurdly strong support for the way we've been raised to understand things. And maybe that support is justified. But counter-information would be interesting to see.

That "the laws of nature have causal agency" is a fun one. It's the word "laws", and the way we understand it, that leads to problems, I think. For our human legal system proffers laws that we consider binding, although they are binding only because we enforce (i.e. reify) those bindings on ourselves. 🙄 And so we can sometimes mistake nature's 'laws' to be binding. We fail to apprehend that it's nature (not its 'laws') that is the master, the reference, and that our formulations of natural laws are descriptive, not proscriptive. That, surely, is a simple misunderstanding, not a paradox? 🤔

I think inevitability does exclude possibilities. It's inevitability itself that is the chimera here, no? 🤔

Our definition of free will is fine, I think. But the thing it describes, the very concept of free will, may have problems. I think it's these that give rise to the paradox?

As for "scientific antirealism", wouldn't it be more intuitive if we called it "anti-(scientific realism)", for that is what it is? Scientific realism is (or contains) a significant and unjustified (unjustifiable) assumption: that the 'reality' our perception shows to us is a more or less accurate rendition of Objective Reality. This has nothing to do with science; science cannot deal with such a thing. There is no evidence - pro or con - to work with, so there is no analysis, and no conclusions may be drawn. Metaphysics can deal with such things, but science cannot. As regards this assumption, scientific realism is a faith position. And its opposite is another perspective, not a paradox.
Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"
Steve3007
Posts: 10339
Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm

Re: Has Philosophy Lost Its Mind?

Post by Steve3007 »

Marvin_Edwards wrote:I'm still slowly reading the SEP article and haven't gotten to section 4 yet. But to me, the notion of "antirealism" would be something like solipsism, where external reality is being denied.
I can see why you would think that, but I think it's closer to instrumentalism. My view is that various empirical discoveries in physics have led to it. I've tried to explore it more in various previous topics here in the science section.
User avatar
Marvin_Edwards
Posts: 1106
Joined: April 14th, 2020, 9:34 pm
Favorite Philosopher: William James
Contact:

Re: Has Philosophy Lost Its Mind?

Post by Marvin_Edwards »

Pattern-chaser wrote: April 27th, 2020, 8:59 am
Marvin_Edwards wrote: April 26th, 2020, 1:09 pm

All the false implications of deterministic causal necessity. The notion that causation can cause events or that determinism can determine events (reification fallacy). The notion that the laws of nature have causal agency (metaphorical thinking). The notion that inevitability excludes possibilities and choices (figurative thinking).

The impossible "philosophical" definition of free will (freedom from causal necessity is an oxymoron).

And doesn't the phrase "scientific antirealism" strike you as at least a bit paradoxical?
Before I started this reply, I checked the definition of "paradox". It describes a seeming contradiction. I had misunderstood it to mean that the contradictions are real and actual. It just shows what little confusions I still carry around, even at my age. 😊 So a paradox is a situation that seems to contain contradictions. OK.

Causation gives rise to "false implications"? I'd be interested to know what they are? In a recent discussion of causation, and whether it always applies, I noted absurdly strong support for the way we've been raised to understand things. And maybe that support is justified. But counter-information would be interesting to see.

That "the laws of nature have causal agency" is a fun one. It's the word "laws", and the way we understand it, that leads to problems, I think. For our human legal system proffers laws that we consider binding, although they are binding only because we enforce (i.e. reify) those bindings on ourselves. 🙄 And so we can sometimes mistake nature's 'laws' to be binding. We fail to apprehend that it's nature (not its 'laws') that is the master, the reference, and that our formulations of natural laws are descriptive, not proscriptive. That, surely, is a simple misunderstanding, not a paradox? 🤔

I think inevitability does exclude possibilities. It's inevitability itself that is the chimera here, no? 🤔

Our definition of free will is fine, I think. But the thing it describes, the very concept of free will, may have problems. I think it's these that give rise to the paradox?

As for "scientific antirealism", wouldn't it be more intuitive if we called it "anti-(scientific realism)", for that is what it is? Scientific realism is (or contains) a significant and unjustified (unjustifiable) assumption: that the 'reality' our perception shows to us is a more or less accurate rendition of Objective Reality. This has nothing to do with science; science cannot deal with such a thing. There is no evidence - pro or con - to work with, so there is no analysis, and no conclusions may be drawn. Metaphysics can deal with such things, but science cannot. As regards this assumption, scientific realism is a faith position. And its opposite is another perspective, not a paradox.
Paradoxes come from our imperfect ways of explaining things. We humans often speak figuratively and metaphorically. For example, the hard determinist claims that if we live in a world of perfectly reliable causes and effects, then there are no choices. Is that literally true? Or only a figurative statement? What he means to say is that it is "AS IF there are no choices". That is, the outcome is already determined, so it is as if choosing never happens. But figurative statements have a small problem. They are always literally false. Choosing does happen. We objectively observe people going into a restaurant, browsing the menu, and placing an order. That's what we humans call "choosing". And it really happens. Therefore, the hard determinist's claim is literally false.

And, even in a perfectly deterministic world, choosing happens. And whenever it happens we will have at least two real possibilities and we will be able to choose either one. There is no way to get to the single inevitable choice without first considering both possibilities and choosing between them. Thus, in the real world, causal inevitability guarantees multiple possibilities. They are right there in the causal chain.
User avatar
thrasymachus
Posts: 520
Joined: March 7th, 2020, 11:21 am

Re: Has Philosophy Lost Its Mind?

Post by thrasymachus »

Marvin_EdwardsWhen I was growing up, science was empirical. Empirical meant that it was based upon objective observation, rather than mere subjective opinions. Its facts were derived inductively, by observing reliable patterns of behavior in its objects of study. Scientific theories were tested by practical experiments that confirmed or denied their correspondence with empirical reality.

But I hadn't seen the word empirical used in a while by others in philosophical discussions. So I thought I'd look it up in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. And where did I find it?

Well there were several articles, but the one that caught my eye was called "Scientific Realism". That seemed like the logical place to find what I was looking for, because that sounded like the very essence of empiricism. Scientific realism would surely be what empiricism was all about.

But where did empiricism show up? Under the section heading "4. Antirealism: Foils for Scientific Realism", "4.1 Empiricism"!

So I went back to the top of the article to find out what the philosophical notion of "scientific realism" is. And the article starts out with this all too common caveat in the SEP:
"It is perhaps only a slight exaggeration to say that scientific realism is characterized differently by every author who discusses it, and this presents a challenge to anyone hoping to learn what it is."

Has philosophy lost its mind?
No, Marvin. But do you know why scientific realism is an issue? If your answer to this is no, then you have a lot of reading to do. Why not ask, What are these people talking about? Then read about it. Not easy, but neither is physics, and you've read this.
User avatar
thrasymachus
Posts: 520
Joined: March 7th, 2020, 11:21 am

Re: Has Philosophy Lost Its Mind?

Post by thrasymachus »

hegel
Why do you come to a philosophy forum to bash philosophy? Serious question. What is your point?
On the other hand, you are a good Hegelian (your moniker). So what is your response to the confusion about scientific realism? What would Hegel say?
User avatar
Jack D Ripper
Posts: 610
Joined: September 30th, 2020, 10:30 pm
Location: Burpelson Air Force Base
Contact:

Re: Has Philosophy Lost Its Mind?

Post by Jack D Ripper »

To the title of this thread, philosophy never had a mind. It is people (and possibly other animals) that have minds. The body of philosophical writings are the expressions of different people, some of whom are intelligent and wrong, some of whom may be right, and some of whom are idiots and wrong.

In the case of what science is, you will find that philosophers disagree on that, just like pretty much everything else. So some of them may well have crazy ideas on what it is.

hegel wrote: April 25th, 2020, 12:56 pm
Marvin_Edwards wrote: April 25th, 2020, 7:47 am When I was growing up, science was empirical. Empirical meant that it was based upon objective observation, rather than mere subjective opinions. Its facts were derived inductively, by observing reliable patterns of behavior in its objects of study. Scientific theories were tested by practical experiments that confirmed or denied their correspondence with empirical reality.

But I hadn't seen the word empirical used in a while by others in philosophical discussions. So I thought I'd look it up in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. And where did I find it?

Well there were several articles, but the one that caught my eye was called "Scientific Realism". That seemed like the logical place to find what I was looking for, because that sounded like the very essence of empiricism. Scientific realism would surely be what empiricism was all about.

But where did empiricism show up? Under the section heading "4. Antirealism: Foils for Scientific Realism", "4.1 Empiricism"!

So I went back to the top of the article to find out what the philosophical notion of "scientific realism" is. And the article starts out with this all too common caveat in the SEP:


Has philosophy lost its mind?

Why do you come to a philosophy forum to bash philosophy? Serious question. What is your point?

There is a lot of bad philosophy that deserves bashing. Also, almost all of the famous philosophers spent some time bashing other philosophers in their writings. Correcting mistakes and trying to get rid of bad ideas in philosophy is worthwhile, isn't it? Otherwise, it is just a conglomeration of disparate bits, most of which is likely total garbage. Certainly, most of it must be false, since philosophers pretty much all contradict each other.
Post Reply

Return to “Philosophy of Science”

2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise
by John K Danenbarger
January 2023

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul

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

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023

The Unfakeable Code®

The Unfakeable Code®
by Tony Jeton Selimi
April 2023

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are
by Alan Watts
May 2023

Killing Abel

Killing Abel
by Michael Tieman
June 2023

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead
by E. Alan Fleischauer
July 2023

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough
by Mark Unger
August 2023

Predictably Irrational

Predictably Irrational
by Dan Ariely
September 2023

Artwords

Artwords
by Beatriz M. Robles
November 2023

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope
by Dr. Randy Ross
December 2023

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes
by Ali Master
February 2024

2022 Philosophy Books of the Month

Emotional Intelligence At Work

Emotional Intelligence At Work
by Richard M Contino & Penelope J Holt
January 2022

Free Will, Do You Have It?

Free Will, Do You Have It?
by Albertus Kral
February 2022

My Enemy in Vietnam

My Enemy in Vietnam
by Billy Springer
March 2022

2X2 on the Ark

2X2 on the Ark
by Mary J Giuffra, PhD
April 2022

The Maestro Monologue

The Maestro Monologue
by Rob White
May 2022

What Makes America Great

What Makes America Great
by Bob Dowell
June 2022

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!
by Jerry Durr
July 2022

Living in Color

Living in Color
by Mike Murphy
August 2022 (tentative)

The Not So Great American Novel

The Not So Great American Novel
by James E Doucette
September 2022

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches
by John N. (Jake) Ferris
October 2022

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All
by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
November 2022

The Smartest Person in the Room: The Root Cause and New Solution for Cybersecurity

The Smartest Person in the Room
by Christian Espinosa
December 2022

2021 Philosophy Books of the Month

The Biblical Clock: The Untold Secrets Linking the Universe and Humanity with God's Plan

The Biblical Clock
by Daniel Friedmann
March 2021

Wilderness Cry: A Scientific and Philosophical Approach to Understanding God and the Universe

Wilderness Cry
by Dr. Hilary L Hunt M.D.
April 2021

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute: Tools To Spark Your Dream And Ignite Your Follow-Through

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute
by Jeff Meyer
May 2021

Surviving the Business of Healthcare: Knowledge is Power

Surviving the Business of Healthcare
by Barbara Galutia Regis M.S. PA-C
June 2021

Winning the War on Cancer: The Epic Journey Towards a Natural Cure

Winning the War on Cancer
by Sylvie Beljanski
July 2021

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream
by Dr Frank L Douglas
August 2021

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts
by Mark L. Wdowiak
September 2021

The Preppers Medical Handbook

The Preppers Medical Handbook
by Dr. William W Forgey M.D.
October 2021

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress: A Practical Guide

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress
by Dr. Gustavo Kinrys, MD
November 2021

Dream For Peace: An Ambassador Memoir

Dream For Peace
by Dr. Ghoulem Berrah
December 2021