Logik's guide to successful detox from Philosophy Now

General chit-chat

Moderators: AMod, iMod

User avatar
attofishpi
Posts: 3387
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
Location: Orion Spur
Contact:

Re: Logik's guide to successful detox from Philosophy Now

Post by attofishpi » Wed Jul 10, 2019 2:17 pm

Skepdick wrote:
Wed Jul 10, 2019 2:11 pm
attofishpi wrote:
Wed Jul 10, 2019 1:23 pm
Discerning the true backbone to the nature of reality.
Given two competing theories as to the 'nature of reality' how do you discern which one is more true?
Only TWO - ??

Skepdick
Posts: 1469
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Logik's guide to successful detox from Philosophy Now

Post by Skepdick » Wed Jul 10, 2019 2:18 pm

attofishpi wrote:
Wed Jul 10, 2019 2:17 pm
Only TWO - ??
I figured I'll start with the easy question.

Solve for N.

User avatar
Eodnhoj7
Posts: 4496
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Logik's guide to successful detox from Philosophy Now

Post by Eodnhoj7 » Thu Jul 11, 2019 10:11 pm

Skepdick wrote:
Tue Jul 09, 2019 7:48 pm
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Tue Jul 09, 2019 6:32 pm
False, as all phenomenon as existing having positive and negative qualities where they are always fit for one purpose but not for another. In these respects all phenomenon are meaningful considering a loop occurs where:

1. A is fit for B, but not C.
2. C is fit for D but requires B.
3. A is fit for C in the context of the whole progression but not the relative localized position in its specific time.

The question of fitness is defined by connection in these respects, where the connection in the above example is strictly a linear progression which sets the premise for evolution as the process of time.
What purpose is philosophy fit for?
The question is less of purpose but rather how is it not intertwined in the basic fabric of all knowledge? Phd means Doctor of Philosophy. What the sciences are, by admission of the academic title alone, is philosophy.

Philosophy at its root is "reflection" by nature, where patterns are observed as repeating and the observation of these patterns sets the grounds for knowledge as a pattern in itself.

Skepdick
Posts: 1469
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Logik's guide to successful detox from Philosophy Now

Post by Skepdick » Fri Jul 12, 2019 1:31 pm

Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Thu Jul 11, 2019 10:11 pm
The question is less of purpose but rather how is it not intertwined in the basic fabric of all knowledge? Phd means Doctor of Philosophy. What the sciences are, by admission of the academic title alone, is philosophy.
You are conflating science with academia.

PhD also means "I have demonstrated ability to work crazy hours for years at a time for little to no pay and I am about to catch a wake up call that my academic credentials don't mean anything in practice."
Eodnhoj7 wrote:
Thu Jul 11, 2019 10:11 pm
Philosophy at its root is "reflection" by nature
And reflection is not a group activity. So maybe Aristotle was right: know thyself.

uwot
Posts: 4360
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2012 7:21 am

Re: Logik's guide to successful detox from Philosophy Now

Post by uwot » Fri Jul 12, 2019 3:01 pm

Skepdick wrote:
Tue Jul 09, 2019 7:48 pm
What purpose is philosophy fit for?
Philosophy is basically story telling. Since philosophy of science is my field, I'll stick to that. So whereas science examines phenomena, and is mostly concerned with generating mathematical models that describe the phenomena accurately, the job of philosophy is to provide conceptual models (paradigms in Kuhn's terms) that can be explored and developed logically. So for instance, Einstein's concept of warped spacetime as the cause of gravity is philosophy, while his field equations are science.

Skepdick
Posts: 1469
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Logik's guide to successful detox from Philosophy Now

Post by Skepdick » Fri Jul 12, 2019 3:03 pm

uwot wrote:
Fri Jul 12, 2019 3:01 pm
Skepdick wrote:
Tue Jul 09, 2019 7:48 pm
What purpose is philosophy fit for?
Philosophy is basically story telling. Since philosophy of science is my field, I'll stick to that. So whereas science examines phenomena, and is mostly concerned with generating mathematical models that describe the phenomena accurately.
So if a model accurately describes a phenomenon then it is fit for purpose.
Conversely - if a model doesn't accurately describe a phenomenon then it's not fit for purpose.

This begs the Protagorean question: What is the unit-measure for 'accuracy' and what is it calibrated against?

uwot
Posts: 4360
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2012 7:21 am

Re: Logik's guide to successful detox from Philosophy Now

Post by uwot » Fri Jul 12, 2019 3:33 pm

Skepdick wrote:
Fri Jul 12, 2019 3:03 pm
What is the unit-measure for 'accuracy' and what is it calibrated against?
Well, Newton's inverse square law was perfectly adequate for getting men to the Moon and back. So it is fit for that purpose. Your "unit-measure for accuracy" depends on the level of accuracy your purpose requires.

Skepdick
Posts: 1469
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Logik's guide to successful detox from Philosophy Now

Post by Skepdick » Fri Jul 12, 2019 3:37 pm

uwot wrote:
Fri Jul 12, 2019 3:33 pm
Your "unit-measure for accuracy" depends on the level of accuracy your purpose requires.
I am not sure that answer would satisfy many...

You seem to be conflating the concepts of 'unit' and 'quantity'.

uwot
Posts: 4360
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2012 7:21 am

Re: Logik's guide to successful detox from Philosophy Now

Post by uwot » Fri Jul 12, 2019 3:45 pm

Skepdick wrote:
Fri Jul 12, 2019 3:37 pm
I am not sure that answer would satisfy many...
They're free to put their case.
Skepdick wrote:
Fri Jul 12, 2019 3:37 pm
You seem to be conflating the concepts of 'unit' and 'quantity'.
You think? Fair enough. Why do you think that?

Skepdick
Posts: 1469
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Logik's guide to successful detox from Philosophy Now

Post by Skepdick » Fri Jul 12, 2019 3:53 pm

uwot wrote:
Fri Jul 12, 2019 3:45 pm
You think? Fair enough. Why do you think that?
Because if the question is "How accurate is Newton's inverse square law?"
The answer 42 doesn't seem sufficient.

42 is only a quantity. It requires a meaningful unit. 42 what?

Further - you seem to have avoided the question. You asserted that Newton's inverse square law was adequate. So you ended up answering a question of adequacy even though I was asking you a question of accuracy.

Newton's inverse square law may have been adequate for the purpose of getting to the Moon and back, but was it accurate for the purpose of describing phenomena?

uwot
Posts: 4360
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2012 7:21 am

Re: Logik's guide to successful detox from Philosophy Now

Post by uwot » Fri Jul 12, 2019 4:35 pm

Skepdick wrote:
Fri Jul 12, 2019 3:53 pm
42 is only a quantity. It requires a meaningful unit. 42 what?
42 anythings you divide by 42. That's how scientific units work.
Skepdick wrote:
Fri Jul 12, 2019 3:53 pm
Further - you seem to have avoided the question. You asserted that Newton's inverse square law was adequate. So you ended up answering a question of adequacy even though I was asking you a question of accuracy.
Yeah, but I made the point
uwot wrote:
Fri Jul 12, 2019 3:33 pm
Your "unit-measure for accuracy" depends on the level of accuracy your purpose requires.
Skepdick wrote:
Fri Jul 12, 2019 3:53 pm
Newton's inverse square law may have been adequate for the purpose of getting to the Moon and back, but was it accurate for the purpose of describing phenomena?
Well, phenomena are only phenomena if they are witnessed. Science generally only accounts for the stuff it is aware of, and until the advance of the perihelion of Mercury was witnessed, Newton accurately described the phenomena that technology of the time could discern.

Skepdick
Posts: 1469
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2019 11:16 am

Re: Logik's guide to successful detox from Philosophy Now

Post by Skepdick » Fri Jul 12, 2019 7:38 pm

uwot wrote:
Fri Jul 12, 2019 4:35 pm
Skepdick wrote:
Fri Jul 12, 2019 3:53 pm
42 is only a quantity. It requires a meaningful unit. 42 what?
42 anythings you divide by 42. That's how scientific units work.
But we aren't talking about scientific units (in general)?
We are talking about accuracy (in particular).

In particular - the metre is the unit of measurement for distance.
42 is the quantity. Meters is the unit.
42 meters divided by 42 still gives you 1 meter.

In particular - the kilogram is the unit of measurement for mass.
42 is the quantity. Kilograms is the unit.
42 kilograms divided by 42 still gives you 1 kilogram.

In particular - what is the unit of measurement for accuracy?
uwot wrote:
Fri Jul 12, 2019 3:33 pm
Your "unit-measure for accuracy" depends on the level of accuracy your purpose requires.
The unit of measure for accuracy doesn't depend on the purpose.
The quantity (amount?) of accuracy required depends on the purpose.

Whatever the unit-measure for accuracy, different purposes will require different quantities of it.

uwot
Posts: 4360
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2012 7:21 am

Re: Logik's guide to successful detox from Philosophy Now

Post by uwot » Fri Jul 12, 2019 9:15 pm

Skepdick wrote:
Fri Jul 12, 2019 3:53 pm
In particular - what is the unit of measurement for accuracy?
To the best of my knowledge, there isn't one. This could be your chance for SI immortality. If you can determine a way to measure it, we could be measuring accuracy in Skepdicks. Skeps perhaps, or even Dicks if you lean that way. Ah, but what's in a name? You could always change it later.
Skepdick wrote:
Fri Jul 12, 2019 3:53 pm
Whatever the unit-measure for accuracy, different purposes will require different quantities of it.
Well yeah, but I don't imagine NASA lost too much sleep over whether Newton could get them to the Moon and back.

User avatar
Sculptor
Posts: 570
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2019 11:32 pm

Re: Logik's guide to successful detox from Philosophy Now

Post by Sculptor » Fri Jul 12, 2019 9:18 pm

Logik wrote:
Wed May 01, 2019 3:01 pm
1. Obtain a temporary e-mail address at https://www.guerrillamail.com
2. Edit your profile and update your e-mail address to the temporary one above.
3. Follow activation instructions in the message received at https://www.guerrillamail.com
4. Generate random password at https://passwordsgenerator.net/ (DO NOT write this down)
5. Edit your profile and update your password.
6. Logout

If it works this post should be final.
You can do that. But what is to stop you trying again?

User avatar
Sculptor
Posts: 570
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2019 11:32 pm

Re: Logik's guide to successful detox from Philosophy Now

Post by Sculptor » Fri Jul 12, 2019 9:19 pm

Arising_uk wrote:
Wed May 01, 2019 7:37 pm
He means this site is addictive. :)
Getting personal abuse is addictive to masochists.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests