Why can't people admit that the humanities are obsolete?

No, there are no goals that mankind is working towards

Case in point: We don't agree about them

>humanities
>obsolete
this fucking meme

>humanity
>goals

K E K

Summer sure is hot this year

Maybe not consciously, but it's hard to deny the direction that society is moving in.
Excellent arguments. Well done.

>it's hard to deny the direction that society is moving in

Every fucking where

You think history is a linear path?

History, no, but there exists only one global society now.

>only one global society

I'd like to see you prove this

>feminists will never allow us to create robot girls like this
why even live

Humanities cannot be applied in any capacity. It follows directly that they have no use. Not sure why this is a discussion at all.

>implying Japan gives 2 shit about feminists

>I want to rape robots
You're why God doesn't talk to us anymore. Thanks for putting us on the cosmic sex offender registry you waifu fuck.

Robots can't be raped tumbler

Are you serious?

Modern social cohesion is totally derived from Antique, Medieval Catholic, and Enlightenment philosophers. The very way you think socially was literally dictated by ideals from hundreds of years ago. If you really want to see the impact that philosophy can make on a society, just look at the difference between Western societies and Chinese society.

Alright, point taken, but I still fail to see how that information can ever be applied in a practical sense.

>is there some other goal that mankind has been working towards?
Yes, you'd know this if you studied the humanities.

That only affects the elite thinkers. Movement are done by the masses.

>feminists will never allow
You ever notice that at their core, people who bitch about feminism implicitly admit that they let women control their lives?

>the masses
Meanwhile, even a pleb like you can't form thoughts outside of the French Revolutionary tradition.

If a group of people thinks a certain way, or shares certain ideals, they'll value some methods of cohesion over others. Communities work in different ways. These can involve respecting or neglecting ideas as to the sciences and mathematics, or the method of the governance of a state or even the definition of the state. The level of impact thought can have on a human society is enormous, and it's all a matter of what it means to "get it right".

>Excellent arguments. Well done.
You actually want people to put effort in when replying to this retard tier bait thread?

No.

Not really my point, are you triggered?

Are you referring to the classic liberal arts??

They will never be obsolete.

When I watch films with younger friends, they are always amazed at the classic mythology that defines their entertainment.

Which I tell them about.

Without someone passing on this knowledge, future generations would wander through an empty eternal now.

Give youth a foundation to build on.
They like knowing that previous generations pondered the same sort of problems .

Do they pay you for this? Does this knowledge allow you to do meaningful work? Does this contribute to society in some way? No? Then why do you bring it up?

>Does this venerate God?
>Y/N

NO DANCING OR PLAYS OR FUN EVER

>utilitarianism

>babbys first socio-philosophical argument

Look around you. Society is expressly utilitarian. Typing the word in green does nothing to change that.

And that's why western societies are in full support of torture.

The hardest things for technology to emulate are those things learned and practiced in the humanities.

>humanities is good for changing society
>we don't need humanities because society is bad

I love Latin. It's like a link to the past. It's amazing that people who lived thousands of years ago were the same as they are today.

Culture is more important than science. It's what holds everyone together. I think it's important to understand western civilization

Humanities aren't obsolete they've often just been downgraded to the point where there is no real analysis and effort in many schools and self education isn't much of a thing anymore.

When a student is forced to take Philosophy 100 (basically middle school level philosophy) it does nothing but give the student a free A, a pat on the ass, and they walk away learning nothing.

If you want to argue utilitarianism yeah humanities can often be SOL but I've often found that helping to steer society or change the outlook of others isn't done on a global scale but one person at a time.

>humanities are obsolete
>posts a goofy "LeL sO fUtUrIsTiC" anime fedora image

kek go away

Even if there were some kind of analysis, how would that elevate their usefulness?

>Excellent arguments.
>says the guy who provided no arguments

Pathetic.

Define useful

>this post
>that pic
>this entire thread
You may be a Veeky Forumsfag op but you're about as intelligent as females who only majored in english because that's what all their friends did

For instance, nobody is going to pay you to bloviate as you've been doing in this thread.

You sound like you're still paying off some college debt.

A lot of otherwise unemployable folk depend on it like lampreys,

>if something does not have an immediate, material, "practical" application then it is useless
Autism goes in /pol/ and /r9k/ and muh science shitposting goes in Veeky Forums; take your pick

>ignore genuine points
>y-you're just writing fancy!

STEMfags truly are the obnoxious cancer of this board

No actually. Uni in my country is pretty cheap (UK), my parents are wealthy, and I'm doing applied math.

>nobody is going to pay you
>pay you
>pay
How does it feel being a common slave to your desires of material wealth?

there will always be a place for textual analysis as long as text exists. it's not obsolete

Do you just hate... living? Like, seriously user do you want the whole world to just exist to work and produce some kind of physical product?

We're not robots, there has to be a study of human behavior and thinking if we want to carry on as a species without falling into anarchy or becoming mindless working husks.

The argument of STEM plebs is that science brings "progress". But, What is progress?

I'm not rejecting the tecnological advancement as a fundamental factor for civilization. The thing that piss me off is the absolute reductionist view of STEM plebs, what a fucking simpletones. How can you explain human rights, democracy, ethics, will to live from a pure scientific point?

Science also needs a philosophical basis in order to work properly and a good scientist would recognize the limitations of his art.

In this decadent era, humanities have been descarted by the global market, science (applied without a integral vision of the world) is its new tool.

Good job STEM fanboys, you are building a world of human robots and you are killing thinking humans.

>what a fucking simpletones
>STEMfag falseflagging as an illiterate humanitiesfag

You discovered me nigga.

Science is a part of natural philosophy, saying that the whole need to be abolished because of its part is nonsensical.
Are you not even aware of the foundations of empiricism in western philosophy?

>implying humanity has goals

Haha. Your average American family can't agree on dinner. Goals of humanity. Hahahha

what do modern philosophers contribute?

sure it helped steer science in its infancy but all of the philosophy worth a shit in the past 50 years has been the meta-theorizing done by scientists on the side.

That's why they're so afraid of it.

Humanities will exist as long as humans exist.

[spoiler]that is, probably not beyond the 21st century: see technological singularity[/spoiler]

thank god that spoilering is allowed on the history board. i don't want to know who won ww2 just yet. but soon i'm going to binge read all my history books.

welcome, newfriend.

Same reason you can't admit that people hold different views from you i suppose.

Because I don't want any fuckwit like Neil Degrasse Tyson or god forbid RICHARD DAWKINS becoming a leader of a country
Scientists, Stem people can be tolerable when they stick to their field but once they actually try to dabble into matters of worldly importance they show just how truly fucking stupid stem people are.

OP is a true last man.

>applied

Underrated post.

I think that the internet has made information explode to a point where you learn all you need to learn from the humanities by just being exposed to media. Its not that the humanities are obsolete, its that teaching them in institutions as much as we do right now does not make much sense anymore.

How then solve inherently human problems like crime etc.?
Also people like to be occupied and enjoy things like art and literature, you can't build a machine for those sorts of things?
Have people like you never wondered what makes us human? What it is to live and be happy? How people should treat one another?

A world were all necessities to sustain life are produced but there is an absence of culture of any sort would be an utter hell to live in.

Some things can't be produced or emulated by machines.

Is the field of Law a part of humanities? If so, are you sure you dont want lawyers, judges, and other legal experts to exist?

>exists only one global society now
Is this a joke? We have villagers in China that barely have knowledge of what happens in China, even less so on the outside world.
If you think the world has reached a "global society" you really need to travel the world a bit and aquire some knowledge of life outside your first world comfort bubble.

Very few humans explicitly want to reach posthumanity (beyond groups like Yudkowskyian rationalists) and those humans are not the ones in charge. (The emphasis on equality in the Western world today is a sign of that. Allowing those who can afford it to live forever and transcend humanity will create the ultimate inequality.) Human obsolescence is an end towards which humanity's machines and systems ("capital") has been propelling it but you should not mistake it for a "goal" because capital, like evolution, is non-teleological (see xenosystems.net/teleology-and-camouflage/); it's human perception that sees either as such.

How are they obsolete? Can we stop this meme lease?

>god forbid RICHARD DAWKINS
Yeah. How Dawkins Got Pwned really drives the point home about the dangers of an intelligent man not understanding the intellectual tradition within which he (unwittingly) operates.

Because we still want to believe we are humans

>there are people thinking this is on the same level as western art and literature

>there are people who think this isn't superior to western art and literature

...

Ayn Rand retard pls go

You're on Veeky Forums for god's sake. And you're really saying people know enough about history and philosophy from youtube, television, and wikipedia?

kek

Yes.

Real philosophers are the rarest kind of human
Its not like science which can be done by any autist, woman or englishman, which is why its done so slowly

As a starting point, you funny little elitist, you.

People should be able to discuss on any terms, at any point of their development in the field, and expect to be answered in a way that is conductive to their learning. That is the point of discussion after all, isnt it? To convey ideas?

What's the point if it's stagnancy and we're all enjoying the smell our own farts. If you want quality, then why did you waste a post complaining instead of contributing?

>Allowing those who can afford it to live forever and transcend humanity will create the ultimate inequality.

Immortality will be for everyone. Imagine people repaying the debt they took to get the immortality operation... FOREVER!

Any other STEMfag out there thinking humanities are a necessity?

Because you have to pay thousands to learn them

checkmate?

>I'm sorry, is there some other goal that mankind has been working towards?
The only goal a species has is survival. And to have its DNA live on.

Sounds like a cool premise to a dystopian novel.

youtube.com/watch?v=fdadZ_KrZVw

Hang on, I'm gonna write this down.

>Imagine people repaying the debt they took to get the immortality operation... FOREVER!
Could be worse. Kind of. slatestarcodex.com/2016/05/28/book-review-age-of-em/

docs.google.com/document/d/1nRSRWbAqtC48rPv5NG6kzggL3HXSJ1O93jFn3fgu0Rs

Certainly.
Through advancements in science many new philosophical problems will be opened and maybe answers to old questions of which barely any have been answered will be found.
I do not think that humanities ever were useless, it is just that they tend to devolve into semantic circlejerks and idealistical wankery dejected from reality. Humanity is stagnating hard in our times, there are no big reforms going on, hopefully this will change soon.

Yes, you need to study them at least to acquire a data that you can process mathematically. Like if you even could invent historical equations without humanitarian data you would struggle to apply all of them to something real. This would right even if you disregard all merits whatsoever of humanities.

Why can't people admit that anime is shit?