Has Science Killed Philosophy? Debate
Re: Has Science Killed Philosophy? Debate
Belinda, Logic has its own method. But, people infer and statements imply. p is sufficient for q, does not imply p is necessary for q, In a binary logic developed by the ancient Greeks it is either true or false and certainly nothing in between. Pharmottra the Indian philosopher 770 CE involved knowledge and the JTB. A belief that is true on what could be good evidence, an idea of believing. Objective claims are not self-evident truths.
Being, a rationalist and therefore normative thinker. I seek certainty. A methodical skeptic to arrive at knowledge but not in suffering, or to be problematic in doubting the conclusion. Remember to imply, and surely we ought to do anything in particular in logic.
Being, a rationalist and therefore normative thinker. I seek certainty. A methodical skeptic to arrive at knowledge but not in suffering, or to be problematic in doubting the conclusion. Remember to imply, and surely we ought to do anything in particular in logic.
Re: Has Science Killed Philosophy? Debate
That was puto's reply to myputo wrote: ↑Thu Jan 06, 2022 9:57 am Belinda, Logic has its own method. But, people infer and statements imply. p is sufficient for q, does not imply p is necessary for q, In a binary logic developed by the ancient Greeks it is either true or false and certainly nothing in between. Pharmottra the Indian philosopher 770 CE involved knowledge and the JTB. A belief that is true on what could be good evidence, an idea of believing. Objective claims are not self-evident truths.
Being, a rationalist and therefore normative thinker. I seek certainty. A methodical skeptic to arrive at knowledge but not in suffering, or to be problematic in doubting the conclusion. Remember to imply, and surely we ought to do anything in particular in logic.
You will find never find objective certainty outside of classical logic or mathematics.But everything is self evident only within the frame of logic which is not the whole of a life.
Re: Has Science Killed Philosophy? Debate
Belinda. Arguing, the Toulmin and arguable claim because of ethical values or warrants, and data? Persuade me about the subject being discussed. Do not just tell me I am wrong but why, and then give me that convincing evidence. Validity of the argument can be established with the assertion placed in context. Do not argue the fact that certainty is about, but challenge the assertion that occurred. Tell me why? Give me your opinion that will become the thesis, capable of being investigated. Tell me who is doing the calculating? Will the square root of 144 alway equal 12, no matter who does the calculation? Make the claim open to challenge. Tell me what is wrong about it. Support your claim with sound principles and values. Solid principles and logical reasons that demonstrate that fact, the warrant is sound.
Re: Has Science Killed Philosophy? Debate
As long as mathematics is what it is the square root will be what it is. But you can't live your life guided by tautologies alone.puto wrote: ↑Sun Jan 09, 2022 4:12 pm Belinda. Arguing, the Toulmin and arguable claim because of ethical values or warrants, and data? Persuade me about the subject being discussed. Do not just tell me I am wrong but why, and then give me that convincing evidence. Validity of the argument can be established with the assertion placed in context. Do not argue the fact that certainty is about, but challenge the assertion that occurred. Tell me why? Give me your opinion that will become the thesis, capable of being investigated. Tell me who is doing the calculating? Will the square root of 144 alway equal 12, no matter who does the calculation? Make the claim open to challenge. Tell me what is wrong about it. Support your claim with sound principles and values. Solid principles and logical reasons that demonstrate that fact, the warrant is sound.
Re: Has Science Killed Philosophy? Debate
Belinda, okay. Red would be a color. Red is a superior color to blue. Both were tautologies, and had cognitive content. One was an objective truth, and had a denial. The other was too subjective to argue. The cat was on the mat, and the most interesting type of sentence we run into everyday. Intension and not trying to manipulate the readers’ reaction to the term. Knowing, how philosophy and science works through academia.
Re: Has Science Killed Philosophy? Debate
Philosophy studies physical, metaphysical, and ethical matters. Science has taken over the physical, but not the other two. Thus, I think science might have killed the philosophy of physical matters only, but the metaphysical and ethical concerns are beyond science.
Re: Has Science Killed Philosophy? Debate
Jori, I think instead of your "science might have killed" you may want to substitute "science adequately deals with".Jori wrote: ↑Wed Jan 12, 2022 8:21 am Philosophy studies physical, metaphysical, and ethical matters. Science has taken over the physical, but not the other two. Thus, I think science might have killed the philosophy of physical matters only, but the metaphysical and ethical concerns are beyond science.
Re: Has Science Killed Philosophy? Debate
Tautology does not pertain to phenomena.puto wrote: ↑Mon Jan 10, 2022 4:40 pm Belinda, okay. Red would be a color. Red is a superior color to blue. Both were tautologies, and had cognitive content. One was an objective truth, and had a denial. The other was too subjective to argue. The cat was on the mat, and the most interesting type of sentence we run into everyday. Intension and not trying to manipulate the readers’ reaction to the term. Knowing, how philosophy and science works through academia.
Re: Has Science Killed Philosophy? Debate
Hold on, Descartes' belief base was that science be saved and using the Method of Doubt. Augustine, the philosopher, argued truth for natural or philosophical knowledge. Communis Cursus Naturae: The common course of nature. Realism or Mechanical Philosophy and you are arguing philosophical naturalism. Let me help you out are you a methodical naturalist? What type of definition of supernaturalism are you arguing? Scientific Inquiry: An absolutely predominant position, capable of solving, and explaining or passing judgment on everything. Mathematics, philosophy, and religion, theology were my majors in college and still studying them. So, let the argument begin with Science: A particular type of knowledge. Ancilla in the writings of Saint Augustine. Declamatory supporters of scientism do not have the right to speak for science. Especially those who have no-idea about philosophy, religion, and science, theology.
Re: Has Science Killed Philosophy? Debate
I am sorry puto, but I find your use of English mostly impenetrable.puto wrote: ↑Wed Jan 12, 2022 3:15 pm Hold on, Descartes' belief base was that science be saved and using the Method of Doubt. Augustine, the philosopher, argued truth for natural or philosophical knowledge. Communis Cursus Naturae: The common course of nature. Realism or Mechanical Philosophy and you are arguing philosophical naturalism. Let me help you out are you a methodical naturalist? What type of definition of supernaturalism are you arguing? Scientific Inquiry: An absolutely predominant position, capable of solving, and explaining or passing judgment on everything. Mathematics, philosophy, and religion, theology were my majors in college and still studying them. So, let the argument begin with Science: A particular type of knowledge. Ancilla in the writings of Saint Augustine. Declamatory supporters of scientism do not have the right to speak for science. Especially those who have no-idea about philosophy, religion, and science, theology.
- RCSaunders
- Posts: 4704
- Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2018 9:42 pm
- Contact:
Re: Has Science Killed Philosophy? Debate
And you are certain of that? But you are not certain you are alive, that you feel or want anything, or that you were here yesterday, since none of those can be derived by logic or mathematics alone. How odd.
Re: Has Science Killed Philosophy? Debate
I am not certain I am alive, but I am certain that experience is happening. 'I' am nothing but a more or less durable tangle of experiences. If I should get Alzheimer's disease I will gradually lose the sense of 'I' as memory ceases to function.RCSaunders wrote: ↑Thu Jan 13, 2022 2:13 amAnd you are certain of that? But you are not certain you are alive, that you feel or want anything, or that you were here yesterday, since none of those can be derived by logic or mathematics alone. How odd.
- RCSaunders
- Posts: 4704
- Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2018 9:42 pm
- Contact:
Re: Has Science Killed Philosophy? Debate
Flippant reply does not advance your argument.
- RCSaunders
- Posts: 4704
- Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2018 9:42 pm
- Contact:
Re: Has Science Killed Philosophy? Debate
I don't argue with nonsense.