Einstein's desk after he died

>einstein
>smart

Lol

philosophy killed him

and you philosofags can't refute my argument

"Best" is debatable, but it is certainly a worthy area of study. Science and Maths are both its children and its parents in this age.

underrated

That's because it isn't an argument. It is a statement.

It's not the best nor the worst, but here on Veeky Forums you tards are so ignorant about it and think that it's useless

>what is existentialism

He was killed by a buttmad philosopher who placed philosophy texts on his desk to make it look like Einstein cared about that useless nonsense.

Looks like he was mailing philosophy desu

Engels perhaps said it best
>Natural scientists believe that they free themselves from philosophy by ignoring it or abusing it. They cannot, however, make any headway without thought, and for thought they need thought determinations. But they take these categories unreflectingly from the common consciousness of so-called educated persons, which is dominated by the relics of long obsolete philosophies or from the little bit of philosophy compulsorily listened to at the University (which is not only fragmentary, but also a medley of views of people belonging to the most varied. and usually the worst schools), or from uncritical and unsystematic reading of philosophical writings of all kinds. Hence they are no less in bondage to philosophy, but unfortunately in most cases to the worst philosophy, and those who abuse philosophy most are slaves to precisely the worst vulgarized relics of the worst philosophies.

Good thing you're asking because you clearly don't have a fucking clue.

I get how importand philosophy is. Just measuring things doesn't help at all. Youyou should only measure after you have a theory.

Quantum Mechanics is an example of this, we dont know what causes the wave function but sure enough it works and brainlets are satisfied...

Wow that actually makes perfect sense

>Studied physics when he was in his mental prime
>Studied philosophy when he was going senile and losing mental abilities
Makes sense to me

I lel'd

t. philosofag

Let me translate that to human speak:

>Philosophy is a very narrow field of research BUT for my convenience I will redefine philosophy as "thinking". OH WHAT? SCIENTISTS THINK? LOL THEN YOU ARE USING PHILOSOPHY LOL I WIN AGAIN XDDDD

Every single time. This is not original. In any philosophy threads the same faggots always say this.

>You have to reason and you base your reason on some philosophy

SHUT THE FUCK. THINKING IS NOT PHILOSOPHY. PHILOSOPHY IS WRITING ABOUT BULLSHIT. STOP REDEFINING WORDS AS YOU SEE FIT.

But why are you angry?

Philosophy (from Greek φιλοσοφία, philosophia, literally "love of wisdom"[1][2][3][4]) is the study of general and fundamental problems concerning matters such as existence, knowledge, values, reason, mind, and language.[5][6] The term was probably coined by Pythagoras (c. 570 – c. 495 BC). Philosophical methods include questioning, critical discussion, rational argument and systematic presentation.[7][8] Classic philosophical questions include: Is it possible to know anything and to prove it?[9][10][11] What is most real? However, philosophers might also pose more practical and concrete questions such as: Is there a best way to live? Is it better to be just or unjust (if one can get away with it)?[12] Do humans have free will?

Philosophy is doing research on those topics. Merely 'questioning' is not doing philosophy.

What you say is like me saying that a soccer player is a physicist.

>redefine philosophy as "thinking"
Yeah, no. You're just misinterpreting Engels. Easy as he is, you wouldn't be the first. cf wsws.org/en/articles/2006/05/rock-m02.html wsws.org/en/articles/2006/05/rock-m03.html
Science is implicitly materialist. Serious questions of epistemology and methodology underlie all science, both the resounding successes of physical science in the 20th century - particularly the quantum theory - and the shameful failures, repeatability crises, trivial conclusions, and spinning wheels of psychology and the social "sciences." We owe these achievements and missed opportunities ultimately to the matter of which memes dominated which where. And still do ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3463968/
Engels was right to criticize the natural scientists of his day for their insufficient theoretical support, and it is right to criticize those today who implicitly cling to the adequate supports of today without knowing or questioning why.
Don't you think it's wrong, bordering on shameful, how many departments will turn their nose up at the mere whiff of positivist approaches to social science?

At its core philosophy is about nothing. When philosophers ask questions they do so carrying nothing but their own bias.

When scientists and mathematicians they carry their bias and their technical knowledge of the field. Because of this 'technical' part philosophers are ill equipped to even give opinions.

You talk about 'positivist approaches' but that is no more than wishful thinking. Philosophy in general is nothing but wishful thinking and wishful thinking is not useful in the sciences. In mathematics a little wishful thinking is required which is why math is typically friendlier to philosophers.

The point is, if you had this 'technical knowledge' about any field, you would realize why philosopher's opinions are worth nothing in today's age.

>Ad Hominem
>Error in reasoning
>Dude lmao attacking the person's credibility is totally not an argumentative point
>Dude lmao calling the other person a retard means you lose the argument even if your point was actually better and the other person is legitimately showing signs of mental strain on simple concepts.

This is why Philosophy is fucking trash.

after so much physics and math throughout the day he had to turn off his brain for a while i guess. that notepad with equations is clearly proof of this.

some people choose tv, some people choose comic books, the madman chose philosophy

"Science and Maths are both its children and its parents in this age."

I think philosophy, the study of reasoning is more fundamental than math and certainly science.
How is philosophy a child of math and science?

Philosophy is not a child of science and math.

Philosophy is that really weird unclue who once tried to rape science when it was really young but in the end he could 't but even to this day in every family meeting he puts roofies in our drink, which is why we have stayed sober for a long time.

You are a retard.

Attacking person's credibility is a fallacy since it doesn't guarantee whether the argument is true or not. It might be an indication but it's never assured. Regardless of credibility you should attack the core of the argument.

Ad hominem isn't about calling the person a retard, but about discrediting one's argument based on who makes the argument.

Ex your argument is fucking stupid you dumbass nigger because ... isn't ad hominem.

Niggers are dumb so shut up and you're wrong is ad hominem since you claim his argument to be false basing on the fact of him being a nigger.

You all are wrong. Philosophy is the study of representations. The human brain is limited in what it can sense, the only way for it to differentiate, categorize, predict, and recognize beyond sight, hearing, touch, smell, and taste is through a representation such as language.
But a representation is not the actual thing and so we can spend years arguing whether a representation is correct in matching what it seeks to describe, how accurate it is, and the rules governing it.

For example, a map is a representation of the phenomenon of a piece of land. We can argue about how accurate the map is and what the symbols on it seek to represent.

>philosophy is the study of representations
>Oh what, scientists use representations like maps?
>LOL THEN YOU ARE DOING PHILOSOPHY. WE WIN AGAIN XDDDDD

Nope, same bullshit argument. You are taking it to the point where if I take a shit I am technically doing philosophy.

Stop.

Philosophy is a narrow, narrow, really narrow, reaaaally fucking narrow field of research and it is self contained.

If you take one step to the left then you are already out of philosophy. Science is not philosophy, mathematics is not philosophy.

Did they check it for cum stains?

That's what I'm asking.

...

Here is a pro tip: There's a reason why the people who approve philosophy are in black and white while the people who bash it are in full color.

>Quantum mechanics proves Platonic idealism
KEK
Sure is Spirit Science in here

Empiricists are dark age priests fuck off unenlightened sheep.

is there a "philosophy for dummies" book that summarizes the key points without the super abstruse language philosophers like to use?

there are youtube series dedicated to philosophy

The words philosophers use are just long synonyms of short words.

Words in philosophy are not like words in math that get abstract. Basically instead of saying dog they say canine.

hmm, maybe i'm getting it confused with literary criticism, but i remember it being really hard to fight through all the sentences to get to the core of the argument
i think it would be really helpful to have a lot of guiding examples, like for the ship of thebes

Philosophy is what great men do when they have down time. Studying that is what meek men do when they're trying to stay meek.

>Study philosophy
>Ask people WHY they would like fries with that

The Veeky Forums guide is something of an outline.
docs.google.com/document/d/1y8_RRaZW5X3xwztjZ4p0XeRplqebYwpmuNNpaN_TkgM/edit?pli=1
You can read the philosophers' wikipedia pages instead of wading through all the books, that should give you a basic competence in philosophy for minimal investment
>abstruse language
It's important to have labels that refer explicitly to various concepts. Think of philosophical jargon as you would the standard notation for various objects in math

Some are "deliberately" obscurantist, to varying degrees, and some aren't.

thanks man

If Einstein was a philosopher, he wouldn't have been famous and you wouldn't have used this picture to use as a retarded attempt to validate your field.

>t. too dumb to into philosophy

>tfw too smart for science

Too bad I don't know how to attach a picture with the big brain guy lol! I studied philosophy for 10 years and I still have no technical skill from it. Maybe one day!

>"Lol the only reason why people in 1760 is because of philosophy lmao"
This is how stupid you sound.

*"Didn't have cars"

Science cucks will never know this feel

>bill nye, dawkins and tyson > einstein, heisenberg, schrödinger and bohr

do you believe that philosophy having value was "debunked" in the last fifty years? there's also a reason why everybody on the left won a nobel prize

Wrong interpretation there, buddy. The correct interpretation is: times change.

Don't worry, you are a philosopher so I am not mad at you. You just don't know better.

It definitely was debunked. Nobody cares about it. The scientists who support philosophy in that picture were all born and all studied at a time where we had little more than classical mechanics. After them that changed. Physics and the rest of science has exponentially grown in knowledge in the past few decades.

Psychology could not simply replace philosophy in topics like morality and it already replaced it in the discussions of "is what we perceive even real".

And that is great! Now instead of crackpots smoking weed saying "Do I FEEL the weed the way the weed IS or is it only a shadow of the WEED duuude lmao xD" we have psychologists who can now empirically pinpoint the failures of our perception and even exploit that with illusions made to expose the limits of our senses.

Philosophy was left behind. And it is simply an evolution

The greek philosophers, even those who did work in law and science, considered themselves philosophers first and only.

The scientists of the past century considered themselves scientists, not philosophers, but said that philosophy guided them

The scientists of today will just call themselves scientists because reading bullshit philosophy is no longer required. You want to guide yourself? Lol read a science book faggot, they exist now and they tell you everything about the universe. No need to ponder the meaning of life when you can literally do active research on the origin of the universe.

>there's also a reason why everybody on the left won a nobel prize

Yeah, for two reasons.

Reason number 1: They got a nobel prize because they were scientists... not philosophers.

Reason number 2: The people in that picture happen to have nobel prices because whatever sperg made that picture is an avid cherry picker.

Probably because as he became a more notable person, and more important in his actions and his statements, he became interested in social affairs and sought better answers to deep questions.

>deep questions

Oh you mean "Do I FEEL the weed the way the weed IS or is it only a shadow of the WEED duuude lmao xD"

And you're telling me philosophy isn't bad for you?
He literally died!

> They got a nobel prize because they were scientists... not philosophers.

and they all were smart enough to into philosophy.

See the connection?

More proofs that you can be extremely intelligent in one field, and completely obvious to the other.

>Philosophy is saying that reality isn't real LMAO

>scientist
>neglecting philosophy
>refuses to perfect himself in what is essentially the art of thinking
>lmbo i'm THE perfect measure of all things! xD
Einstein's last statement in quote written here is terrificly true, you know.

>Einstein researches particle physics for years
>Becoms a genius
>Einstein starts reading philosophy
>Kills himself