›
If you have an email ending in @hotmail.com, @live.com or @outlook.com (or any other Microsoft-related domain), please consider changing it to another email provider; Microsoft decided to instantly block the server's IP, so emails can't be sent to these addresses.
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE

Less Wrong

RottweilerRottweiler
edited 2011-08-20 16:59:56 in Philosophy
Inside, too dark to read
This isn't a Yudkowsky post, but this attitude demonstrates the root problem with that crowd.

"I've often wished for a list of cases where philosophy has proven useful, or has at least anticipated science in drawing correct conclusions."

Modern science is a philosophy, and the next "rationalist" I hear draw this false dichotomy will be beaten to death with the jawbone of Francis Bacon.

Comments

  • MoeDantesMoeDantes
    no longer cuddly, but still Edmond
    Cases where philosophy has proven useful? Hooo boy.

    Let's start with a little book called The Art of War and work from there.

    I a long time ago had a falling out with "rationalism" when I realized that rationalists were often no better than eighteenth-century witch hunters. Just that instead of basing their beliefs in a corrupted version of God, they're basing them in a corrupted version of Science.
  • NyktosNyktos
    a little muffled
    @Rottweiler:
    Modern science is a philosophy
    Define "philosophy".
  • MillerCrossMillerCross
    You can change. You can.
    I wouldn't say that Modern science is a philosophy, but I would definetly say that modern science applies philosophy to its works.
  • RottweilerRottweiler
    Inside, too dark to read
    @Nyktos: Love of knowledge, or a theory of knowledge.
  • MillerCrossMillerCross
    You can change. You can.
    That's only epistemology, Rott.
  • BeeBee
    I'm more curious as to how you plan on procuring Francis Bacon's jawbone.

    And every time I see Francis Bacon I can't help but think of this guy instead.
  • Wicked223Wicked223
    We Played Some Open Chords and Rejoiced, For the Earth Had Circled the Sun Yet Another Year
    Love of knowledge, or a theory of knowledge.


    That's a rather idiosyncratic definition, isn't it?
  • PonicalicaPonicalica
    (void)
    @Rottweiler That's not the operational definition of philosophy in 2011 and you know it.
  • MyrmidonMyrmidon
    Science doesn't even have a default philosophy, much as science-loving laymen like to pretend that it's utilitarian mechanistic atomism. David Bohm, Richard Dawkins, Erwin Schrodinger and Richard Feynman would never agree on what reality was.

    Not that Feynman ever tried to figure out what reality was, the punk.
  • BeeBee
    There's always the Paul Erdos approach to philosophy.

    If you're cool with amphetamine-induced seizures and all.
  • TheMightyAnonymTheMightyAnonym
    ~♥YES♥~! I *AM* a ~♥cupcake♥~! ^_^
    People are always bashing LessWrong. ;_;

    In any case, I highly doubt that Eliezer would decline to call his methodology something other than applied philosophy. Nor would most of the crowd, methinks. Speaking of which, I have never seen this Phil guy on there.
Sign In or Register to comment.