Philosophy Now Forum

Will Bouwman asks what really matters when studying matter.

https://philosophynow.org/issues/133/Philosophy_of_Science_The_First_two_and_half_Millennia

Ah, here it is. So slightly over a year from conception to publication, now you can read the finished article. Literally.

Read it, loved it.

A few notes:

1. The screaming Hungarianism. "hypotheses non fingo – ‘I make no hypotheses’." In Hungarian fingani (third person singular, "fing", adjectivised form, similar to present participle, "fingo") means, literally and with all the contextual meaning, to fart.

Hypotheses non fingo, if considered a statement uttered in Hungarian, would mean "Hypotheses that don't fart" or else, the same structure would mean also "Not farting out hypotheses".

2. Screaming anthropo-centrism. The scientific method has been shaped from accepting nothing but appeal to authority, to evidence-based interpretations expressed quantitatively, to Popper's specific test, to "anything goes" peppered (not poppered - big difference) by interest, and by freedom to not to stick to any method.

Seeing that science discovers the world for, by, and through human thought and human workers (scientists), it only goes to show that we have the right to investigate the world in ways that our human nature allows or even dictates.

What's next? Mulk (forgot his name... can't look at the article while I'm writing this, so please... his name was something like Hulk or Mulk or Gulk) offered that methods and opinions get replaced by mutational differentiation, not by rational osmosis. That is, new trends of new generations replace old trends of prior generations, by the prior generation's dying out, and not by convincing the older ones to accept the newer thoughts. This type of event we (a few of our class mates in college) noticed, in our snall ways, because every teacher that was assigned to the class to teach a new programming language, started out by saying that Pascal and PL/1 read data in a row-column sequence, while Fortran or WAT5 reads it in in column-row order. This was the BIG thing in 1984 in computer programming, and every teacher was so pleased to announce it... because they formed a community of like ideas. Not very progressive or individualistic or bright ideas, but common ideas nevertheless, which was the column-row order of reading data.

Philosophy Now wrote: ↑Wed Jul 24, 2019 2:24 pm Will Bouwman asks what really matters when studying matter.

https://philosophynow.org/issues/133/Ph ... _Millennia

So a question was asked, but was an actual answer ever found and given?

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jul 27, 2019 2:25 pmSo a question was asked, but was an actual answer ever found and given?

Well, you could find out by reading it.

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jul 27, 2019 2:25 pm

Philosophy Now wrote: ↑Wed Jul 24, 2019 2:24 pm Will Bouwman asks what really matters when studying matter.

https://philosophynow.org/issues/133/Ph ... _Millennia

So a question was asked, but was an actual answer ever found and given?

Yes! The answer is the same as this: Anything Goes.

I read the article. It really is the answer, by the famous philosopher, Cole Porter.

uwot wrote: ↑Sat Jul 27, 2019 2:34 pm

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jul 27, 2019 2:25 pmSo a question was asked, but was an actual answer ever found and given?

Well, you could find out by reading it.

But I did read it. I came away with there is actually nothing that really matters when studying matter.

I just read a story from one's own interpretation of history, which I saw the author, them self, has no actual conclusion to the question, other than the already obvious fact, which is; People are different and it is people who 'study matter', or do science.

But my gained view could be a completely wrong, thus my clarifying question as to whether the author found an actual answer and gave it or not? Or, was this just meant to be history lesson only? A well written story at that, but it appears to be just another story, based on one's own learned experiences only?

RCSaunders wrote: ↑Sun Jul 28, 2019 1:01 am

Age wrote: ↑Sat Jul 27, 2019 2:25 pm

Philosophy Now wrote: ↑Wed Jul 24, 2019 2:24 pm Will Bouwman asks what really matters when studying matter.

https://philosophynow.org/issues/133/Ph ... _Millennia

So a question was asked, but was an actual answer ever found and given?

Yes! The answer is the same as this: Anything Goes.

I read the article. It really is the answer, by the famous philosopher, Cole Porter.

This is more or less the same answer I saw. The answer being; 'What really matters when studying matter' is nothing. Anything goes. The final conclusion after all is underlined here; No matter what rules are imposed, people break them. anyway.

Therefore, the answer really is; Just about anything goes.

Unless of course I am informed otherwise.

Age wrote: ↑Sun Jul 28, 2019 4:56 amTherefore, the answer really is; Just about anything goes.

Unless of course I am informed otherwise.

Nope, you've pretty much nailed it. Who knows? Maybe the tinfoil hat brigade will one day prove that aliens can't read their brainwaves. In the meantime, scientists who make things that demonstrably work will keep using the science that demonstrably works.

uwot wrote: ↑Sun Jul 28, 2019 7:30 am

Age wrote: ↑Sun Jul 28, 2019 4:56 amTherefore, the answer really is; Just about anything goes.

Unless of course I am informed otherwise.

Nope, you've pretty much nailed it. Who knows? Maybe the tinfoil hat brigade will one day prove that aliens can't read their brainwaves. In the meantime, scientists who make things that demonstrably work will keep using the science that demonstrably works.

So, 'scientists', which are just those people who study matter, which is just every person, who make things that demonstrably work, which again is just every person, will keep using 'science', which is just the study of matter, that demonstrably works. Fair enough. Nothing new here.

Age wrote: ↑Sun Jul 28, 2019 8:51 amNothing new here.

Ah well, I suppose if you already know everything, reading is a bit of a waste of time.

uwot wrote: ↑Sun Jul 28, 2019 10:48 am

Age wrote: ↑Sun Jul 28, 2019 8:51 amNothing new here.

Ah well, I suppose if you already know everything, reading is a bit of a waste of time.

Why would you even assume such a ridiculous thing as this, let alone expose a stupid thought as that one is?

What would make you say such a thing?

Age wrote: ↑Sun Jul 28, 2019 11:37 am

uwot wrote: ↑Sun Jul 28, 2019 10:48 amAh well, I suppose if you already know everything, reading is a bit of a waste of time.

Why would you even assume such a ridiculous thing as this, let alone expose a stupid thought as that one is?

What would make you say such a thing?

A schoolboy sense of mischief.

uwot wrote: ↑Sun Jul 28, 2019 1:17 pm

Age wrote: ↑Sun Jul 28, 2019 11:37 am

uwot wrote: ↑Sun Jul 28, 2019 10:48 amAh well, I suppose if you already know everything, reading is a bit of a waste of time.

Why would you even assume such a ridiculous thing as this, let alone expose a stupid thought as that one is?

What would make you say such a thing?

A schoolboy sense of mischief.

Fair enough.

Philosophy Now wrote: ↑Wed Jul 24, 2019 2:24 pm Will Bouwman asks what really matters when studying matter.

https://philosophynow.org/issues/133/Ph ... _Millennia

nice article...

it is what one claims it is...

-Imp