Newton’s Flaming Laser Sword

Discussion of articles that appear in the magazine.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Post Reply
Philosophy Now
Posts: 1205
Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2010 8:49 am

Newton’s Flaming Laser Sword

Post by Philosophy Now »

Mike Alder explains why mathematicians and scientists don’t like philosophy but do it anyway.

http://philosophynow.org/issues/46/Newt ... aser_Sword
Lionheart
Posts: 1
Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2011 7:23 pm

Engineer at a philosophy conference

Post by Lionheart »

This article reminded me of a SMBC strip about an engineer at a philosophy conference. :)
quen_tin
Posts: 1
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2011 5:34 pm

Re: Newton’s Flaming Laser Sword

Post by quen_tin »

I find it a poor conception of philosophy. As Dennet puts it, "there is no such thing as philosophy-free science, there is only science whose philosophical baggage is taken on board without examination."


>> "From which you will infer that even at an early age I was destined for Science and not for Philosophy."

After thinking during three days and finding a solution to a philosophical problem, the author concludes that he is not destined to philosophy. I find it very contradictory.

>> "we should not dispute propositions unless they can be shown by precise logic and/or mathematics to have observable consequences"

Let us at least discuss what "proposition", "logic", "observable consequences" means. Is it that obvious? Let us then discuss the validity of this (philosophical) principle. This, in my sense, is the role of philosophy.
YehYeh
Posts: 30
Joined: Sat Aug 10, 2013 2:04 pm

Re: Newton’s Flaming Laser Sword

Post by YehYeh »

Above the entrance to Plato's Academy was the inscription "Let no one enter who is untrained in geometry".

Perhaps the entrance of graduate schools of mathematics should have "Let no one enter who is untrained in Plato".
Mike Alder wrote:This pretty much does for Platonism as far as mathematicians are concerned. Axioms stopped being self-evident truths as soon as the work was read and understood. Instead they were simply postulates, and they might be interpreted as true statements about the world, perhaps in several different ways. Or they might not be interpreted at all. Platonism died for mathematicians some centuries ago, and simply looks silly.
Actually, quite a bit of science is Platonic, especially mathematical, theoretical physics. Theories to Plato are hypothetical, whatever is the most reasonable to experts. He held this both for the sensible world of the 'empirical sciences' and for the intelligible world of the 'theoretical sciences'.
niceh
Posts: 1
Joined: Sat Apr 22, 2017 8:26 am

Re: Newton’s Flaming Laser Sword

Post by niceh »

Opposite view.
The empirical science is not equal to science. The human the empirical science is incomplete. The ability of observation for human is limited, and the empirical science is also with great limitations. For example, according to this principle, when people can't confirm that the earth is round, then if those insisted that the earth is not round is truth? This theory is riddled and collapsed of itself!

A created scientist, he doesn't like those with emotions instead of reason that stubborn: fixing the modern science in the fixed frame, thinking that things outside of the empirical science is not science. Imagine, humans don't realize one thing at first, then use the scientific method to realize it out, is it a science? Definitely it became a science. Human beings are constantly improving themselves, anewing to know themselves, then the science developing, finally to understand of the real universe.

For example, the empirical science could not confirm the existence of god, can't confirm the other spaces, can't see lives and the forms of materials exist in the other spaces. So do not admit it only because it hasn't confirmed, and tell people it's superstitious. But hasn't proved with human's limited empirical science, it really doesn't exist? Could not observe is the other space, matters and the forms of lives, with human's limited empirical scientific, then denying it is simple and crude. The attitude itself is not scientific. And refer to Newton, he's also theist. Where should those atheist flee and go?

Now development of the empirical science is very stupid and slowly in that form. Really like a blind touching an elephant, he do not realize the forms of materials existence of the universe, to recognize the existence of the universal features. Then he touched the little and thought it's all. He only touch the elephant leg, he said, oh, science like this way, this is the understanding of the real life and material science. This like what he could see the whole. So don't know the universe is composed of numerous different times and spaces, don't know the other spaces and other forms of lives and materials existence, believing all are superstition by the simple and stubborn person, which is one of the most critical reasons to make our human morality to slip down. Many people go picking up scientific rod to hit the oldest and most essential virtue. Without virtue, god will not treat people as human beings. It's great danger!

He didn't know that mankind has a moral embodiment of this substance on the human body; Don't know human karma and this kind of material around the body. So people all believe that modern science, modern science has proved these. But talking about moral good and evil things, and other scientific things as superstition, actually it is picking up the modern science of the rod, to hit our most essential thing ─ ─ human morality? Isn't it? Because he doesn't admit also confirmed the existence of virtue, they said it is superstition. If human moral ideas disappeared, people will have no method to constraints, no moral norms, people would dare to do anything, dares to do any bad thing, causes the human moral continued to decline. This is the shortage on the one hand, the role of science.
(by Jacque Wei, email me nicehumor@outlook.com)
Post Reply