Tell me Veeky Forums. How can you get excited about physics and math without having, at least at some level...

I'm not sure I get you, if you mean that "in some way math is all philosophy" or "we all do philosophy when we thing deeply about a subject" then I won't fight you on that, but that doesn't do much to rehabilitate the people who are actually called philosophers.

Yeah that's exactly what I meant. And I totally agree with you, I was not trying to defend philosophers but I see now how you could think that. I just sometimes see stuff like 'philosophy is a waste of time' and have this idea.

I sometimes have a hard time expressing myself, even moreso in english.

We need some new word for this, like "mathematical philosophy."

You're looking for theoretical physicists. See, von Neumann, Feynman, Deutsch.

Pure philosopher that touches physics and politics using the same reasoning? Popper.

>Feynman
Are you jesting me right now?
He hated philosophers and the methods of philosophy with a passion.

>He hated philosophers and the methods of philosophy with a passion.
That because almost all at that time (even majority now I think) believe/use the wrong way to create scientific knowledge i.e. empiricism and induction. Which has been disproved by Popper.

You can see what Feynman's method here:
youtube.com/watch?v=EYPapE-3FRw
Not convinced? See David Deutch's:
youtube.com/watch?v=folTvNDL08A

We all hated philosophers that use fancier words than needed too, user. Unless it's poetry or literature I guess.

I'd vouch for that.

I like philosophy. The problem is that most of it is wank.

I think this captures it very well: youtube.com/watch?v=NM-zWTU7X-k

Looks like it's from the same Feynman lecture as

Yes, it is. Give man a fish vs teaching him how to fish.

Another talk. This one's hilarious. Hawkings & Spaceship Earth BTFO. Or is it?? kek:
youtube.com/watch?v=gQliI_WGaGk

I have read the words of Jesus Christ CATTIEwayenelover1

ALL THE WORDS 2060 TIMES

Only PopSci retards (of which Veeky Forums is largely composed) can't appreciate the epistemology that defines and justifies scientific thinking

Falsificationism is very nice and all but all it's worth can fit in a single page.
There is no justification for philosophy as an actual academic endeavour, it's all pure wank.

>excited about physics and math
aircraft fly, cellphone works, etcetera
>respect for philosophy
meh

its all quite simple really.

back in the day when the real scientific progress was made by people spending hours and hours looking at a leaf, or a waterfall
or speeding countless hours reading and researching and doing experiments in their garage, like tesla, edison, ford, etc...

now a days, research and scientific progress is made by multi million dollar companies, or multinational firms, or entire governments.

so its not that important or could even be a hindrance if you were give give a cog in a machine the ability to rationally and critically think in a more philosophical paradigm instead of using physics, math, and chemistry to solve a problem his boss told him to fix
without asking questions like
is it right to fix the problem
what is the best way to fix this problem and do I have the right "tools" to fix it.

so its better to compartmentalize knowledge and expertise for the "greater good"

There used to be no such thing as "philosophy" retard. People were scientists, writers, poets etc. first, philosophers second. Only recently do people consider themselves "philosophers" without actually excelling in some discipline.

Honestly the arrogance of "philosophy" students is what irks me the most. It's like people who call themselves photographers because they own a camera.

>whereas in philosophy it's retarded babby-level stuff like "All men are mortal. Socrates is mortal. Therefore Socrates is a man".
No

I am a diehard christfag, but that proof is stupid. In a natural evolutionary stance our ideas of morality would merely be an adaptation to help our societies develop. Essentially morality would just be an illusion.

You can't. People have been trained to be against philosophy without knowing what it is.

See and the reply thread.

Don't fall in love with this.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Popper#Philosophy_of_science

That's just-splaining, user. What you just did is called verificationism.
Part of philosophy that's self-defeating. So, bad.

Scientific theory is simply falsifiable hard-to-vary theory. You test is to see if it's wrong or temporarily true.
If it's untestable then it's philosophy, aesthetic, psychology, etc.

You're talking about testing a theory with like LHC or applying scientific knowledge? That still needs critical and rational minds. Unlimited money alone can't get you there.
Well, unlimited money alone can give you more tech and services. We call that automation. Like your clothes. But you have to know how to be efficient to produce it, hence, more researching.

Big Short movie is a good example of the always needed researcher.

That's revisionism, part of philosophy. lel

Morality is simply a problem of what to do next.

because the yoneda lemma is true even if you let the trolley kill 5 people instead of 1

Yes, yes, we get it, you like Popper, I like Popper.
It doesn't take years of study to get falsificationism, none of that is actual university level philosophy.

History of science isn't philosophy of science.

Lol is university level that bad? Lemme guess, solipsism, moral relativism, ought-is bullshitism?
Though, you can study all the past & present bad philosophies. It'll be good to see how they fail or not being refuted properly, etc.

You're right. Empiricism almost killed quantum mechanics.