How can they place "Science" and "Philosophy" in the same "Community" when they are two total different things? Do you agree or disagree? That'd be like putting Elmo and Chris Rock on a TV show together. They're both funny, yes...but two total different kinds of humor.

I never really noticed it to even be bothered by it.

Well check out my profile and you'll see what I mean I guess. I just am one of those people who enjoy finding the "right" place to talk and it just seems everywhere I go here on Mingle is the wrong one. Then I come in here, "Science and Philosophy" and I see a post which is "Science" based and I can't help but want to give a "Philosophical" response....guess I need to change....or find a new place to blog or whatever the hell this is called

I agree. Science and philosophy are two entirely different beasts.

Although I suppose an argument could be made that Science is ulimately a philosophy. But I think it would be ridiculus to argue that all philosophy is scientific.

Many people claim that mathematics is a science too. In fact it's often refered to as the "Queen of the Sciences". But it most certainly is not based on science or the scientific method. In fact, I need to write a book about that.

Something that disturbs me for more is how people confuse technology with science. The study of science enables us to create technologies, and creating technologies may very well bring our attention to new scientific discoveries, but science and technology are two entirely different beast as well.

Science is the study of how nature works.

Technology is the exploitation of that knowledge.

People who are waiting for science to solve our problems haven't been paying attention. Science has already give us the ANSWERS!

Don't overpopulate and don't polute so wrecklessly!

People aren't really waiting for science to give them knowledge, instead what they are hoping for is for technology to help them exploit the world in ways that don't require any responsiblity.

Finally, if our abuse of technology is wrecking havoc with our world we shouldn't blame that on science. That's truly a problem of commerce and greed, not one of science or technology really.

Sorry for the rant, but it's a rant thread to begin with so I thought I'd allow myself the luxury of getting carried away.

Science and technology are as distinctly different subjects as are science and philosophy.

awesome response...thank you

It could be worse. They could've combined science and religion

lol true


but for real -- anyone who went to college remember if science and philosophy was in the same area? the same floor? the same building? I doubt it - wasnt where I went

Well there is the real world and there is the creator and maintainers of mingle2's views of the world, they differ greatly. A little knowledge of PHP does not make one a scientist.

Two different subjects which are inextricably linked together.

One cannot completely separate the two.

Science requires philosophy, but not the other way around. Science grew out of philosophy, and it is completely dependent upon observation, whereas philosophy is completely dependent upon making sense.

WHAAAAAAAAAAAT!? THAT IS YOUR EXPLANATION OF PHILOSOPHY?!

creativesoul you just love to piss me off I think....this is what "philosophy" is....it is the "study" of problems and issues in the world through knowledge and many other things. BUT NOT "SENSE"
Philosophy NEEDS ONE THING -- a reasonable argument BUT by no means does it need "sense"...look at the great philosophers...plato - aristole..you think they "made sense" to anyone in their time??

I am noone...

Making sense is the only measure philosophy has. Poorly worded?

Prolly!



Knowledge not through sense?

OK!

Made sense to me . . . .

this has boggled my mind for the few days i have been a memeber.

science requires philosphical thinking. as well as logical thinking.


what happens if.......
Why?

But then the question becomes, "Makes sense to who?"

Most people accept logic as making sense. After all, if something is logically inconsistent most people will say that it is 'illogical' (i.e. nonsensicial).

But logic itself can often be nebulous and even subjective.

Moreover, all of logic depends upon accepting basic premises most of which cannot be proven or even demonstrated to make sense.

Of all the things that I have considered in my life, the one thing that I've come to accept is that the very existence of the universe itself is illogical by any stretch of the concept of what my mind can concieve as being logical.

Therefore I've concluded that my mind (a logical mind I would hope), has accepted that it is not capable of comprehending the true nature of the universe, becasue the true nature of the universe does not make sense in terms of how a logical mind thinks.

The other thing too that I've recognized and find somewhat shocking:

Most of the world's greatest philosophers were dead wrong about a lot of things. And the absurdity of these things should have been apparent to them based on sense.

For example, the overwhelming philosophers throughout all of history have accepted that the world is a continuum. In fact, most modern philosophers still hold this view today. Even mathematicians are quite happy with the idea of a continuous "real number line". They even erroneously believe that calculus supports this idea of a continuum. (it truly doesn't and a simple investigation of the defintions of calculus terms proves this to be a logical truth.

The number of philosophers who were truly brilliant enough to recognize that the universe cannot be a continuum were actually a minority. Ironically the philosophers who were considered to be the greatest ones like Aristotle and Plato were actually wrong.

Zeno of Elea, and Leucippus of Miletus were actually right, but they were considered to be lesser phiolosophers, and still are considered to be lesser philosophers even today.

The idea of a continuum still thrives in the philosophical community as well as the mathematical community even in the face of quantum mechanics.

Zeno, and Leucippus truly have the right to say, "We told you so!".

Yet many philosophers today still don't even see it. Mathematicians are under the totally bogus belief that calculus has answered Zeno's paradoxes of motion. But it most certainly has not.

Philosophers today are still under the bogus belief that they can speak in terms of a continuum in a meaningful way, but that's a totally invalid idea.

In fact, Zeno's whole point was that it doesn't even make sense in terms of pure thought. No need to actually discover quantum mechanics, Zeno PREDICTED IT using pure thought alone. And he was RIGHT.

No its not logic itself that is nebulous, its taking a unfounded premise and then twisting logic to try to prove your conclusion irregardless of the truth of your initial premises.

But what consitutes a true premise?

That's was Zeno's whole point.

The premise of Zeno's day was that the truth of the physical world is the premise that space is a continuum.

Zeno argued with sense (i.e. logic) that such a premise cannot be true.

He was right.

Yet, most philosophers even today do not realize that he was right nor do they even comprehend why his conclusion had to be the only sensible conclusion.

Mathematicians even today demand the existence of a continuous real number line. But it can't be that way and Zeno argued this using logic to show why this can't be the case. Quantum mechanics backs up Zeno's arguments and shows that even the real universe agrees with Zeno.

Yet, mathematicians and philosophers are still arguing for and presuming the existence of a continuum.

Where's the logic in that?

you guys need a vacation. its not that serious

its not serious though...its a discussion...its a philosophical discussion...is it not? is that not the point? in essense...the idea of asking the difference between science and philosophy is a philosophical question.....or am i wrong on that, too?

How to build a bomb is science. Should the bomb be used is philosophy.

How to cure AIDS is science. How to approach the cure of AIDS is philosophy.

How to reverse the effects of mankind on the planet is science. How to manage the reversal is philosophy.

Almost any meaningful discussion of one leads to a discussion of the other.

Many great scientists were great philosophers too.

Its called mingle2ing.