Re: The Grand Design, Philosophy is Dead, and Hubris

Posted by Owen Densmore on Jul 08, 2011; 1:39am
URL: http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/The-Grand-Design-Philosophy-is-Dead-and-Hubris-tp6559131p6560749.html

Personally, I think philosophy is on par with science.

Good lord, how?  Is it as empirical?  Does it create as provably valid models? Or is it simply as worthy an area of study as science?  

I think the Par you are considering would not include your going to a philosopher for medical treatment, right?

 

 But they are in
two different categories.  Science is limited to negation, the
demonstration that some sentence (or class of sentences) does not hold
(here, now, anywhere, anywhen).  

Er, how does Newton deal with negation?  Isn't a clear set of equations saying what *will* happen?  I mean of course one can say, It Is Not The Case That F=ma Is Not True, but really, just how can we think of science limited to negation?

Don't get me wrong, I have great respect for all the rich topics of investigation we pursue, philosophy included.  However, I don't see that they are on par in any way other than you can study it.

        -- Owen

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org