Why must a philosopher know geometry and physics ?

Why must a philosopher know geometry and physics ?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=uy8UGPxpCGs&t=217s
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

Wittgenstein was the last real philosopher. Philosophy is dead.

Physics = applied math + applied philosophy

Geometry is the birthplace of abstraction.

Depends on the kind of philosopher you want to be. If you want to be a classical polymath, you want to know literally anything that can be known, so you can construct the most abstract theory of everything. But you could also choose to be one of those marxist preachers of hatred, as they are usually represented in modern philosophy departments. Then you decided to be an anti-intellectual douchebag and explicitly reject science and math because they are products of the white patriarchy which you want to genocide. So which kind of philosopher are you?

Before you can contemplate the why, you must understand the how.

Or to put it another way,
You must check yourself
before you wreck yourself.

OP here
How we will learn geometry and physics well ? Is there any limit that we can say ".... level is enough for a philosopher" ?

Literally what is your goal as a "philosopher"?

To build an ideal human/state profile to achieve welfare.

So that they're capable of understanding statistics. Statistics is the only field of maths that every real philosopher should be fluent in.

[spoiler]Real Philosophers are now, of course, known as Psychologists.[/spoiler]

All of Euclidean geometry.
All of Classical physics.

So your recommendation is that we have to study psycho with philoshophy ?

If you to to speak with any authority about the nature of the universe, you should understand the deep intersection between geometry and physics. Geometry, in some form, is the background framework for almost all of physics.

In my opinion philosophers need to understand enough math to have a basic grasp of

>logic (not just babby tier propositional but also the huge variety of non-classical logics)
>geometry of spacetime (special and general relativity)
>quantum mechanics (and its interpretations)
>stochastics (mathematical models of randomness)
>computation (what can and cannot be computed/decided)
>economics (resource allocation, consumer choice - immediately destroys all the marxist crap)
>statistics (for the interpretation of social """science""" studies)

Is euclid's elements enough ?

It's the only field that really matters imo.

The goal of life is to be happy. Most people are currently unhappy. Psychology is the field of study concerning how to make the most people the most happy.

All other considerations are secondary.

Bcause theoretical knowledge is empty without practical one.

>Psychology is the field of study concerning how to make the most people the most happy.
Psychology, like any other science, describes phenomena and attempts to find explanatory mechanisms. It has no moral goals. You can also use psychology to make people very unhappy, or even make them kill themselves, e.g. via psychological torture, brainwashing, propaganda, psychological terrorism, emotional abuse.

>economics (resource allocation, consumer choice - immediately destroys all the marxist crap)
Confirmed for not knowing shit about neither economics nor philosophy

Enlighten me, oh wise one.

Regardless of your digression, psychology is currently the most optimal tool for studying and exercising happiness.

>implying happiness exists
Happiness is merely an illusion. Only brainlets can be fooled into believing they were happy. The higher your IQ, the more unhappy you will become since you start questioning more and more. At the pinnacle of intellect you will be forced to embrace total nihilism.

Prove your claim with absolute mathematical rigor or adopt the title of Cerebrulus for the rest of your intellectually challenged life.

...

absurdism > nihilism

Glib bastard.

OP HERE

I am planning to study 1)Euclid's Elements
2)Serway's Basic Physics books

Is these enough ?

I'd suggest you brush up on your English.
Pedantry over words is one of the more important burdens the Philosopher has to bear.
Saying "Is these enough?" is absolutely unacceptable.

Study whatever you want. Just don't go around, pretending you know shit.

kek

>philosopher

How much the average Philosophy Phd student knows about science?
Can we say at least he has a clear view on math and physics on undergrad level?

At my uni, I'm sure they have to study logic, epistemology and philosophy of science at some point in their undergrad. It's not so bad imo

youtube.com/watch?v=uy8UGPxpCGs&t=217s

Go to 2 minutes in.

>water atoms
>water is made of CO2

That actually sounds really bad.

go to 7:40
she obviously made a mistake

Not even close.

Is Saul Kripke not a real philosopher?

Camus>Sartre

What did Wittgenstein even contribute that wasn't known in the movement already?

Prove the goal of life is to be happy.
Prove that our aim should be making the most people happy.
What do you mean by the most happy? Is it better to have one perfect moment or many just nice moments? Is it better to have an okay life or one with great moments between anguish and despair?

Too many assumptions. If you want to be a philosopher, first you have to be rigorous.

Satan

Why would a self proclaimed "lover of knowledge" need any justification to learn new things?