Einstein got it – philosophy and science do go hand in hand

Mott the Hoople said:
It did. Logic, rhetoric, epystomolgy, etc., are all common tools of thought scientists use but in the broader sense science is a philosophy. Newton’s title of his great work was Philosopiae Naturalis Principia Mathimatica.
Click to expand...

A Philosophy background gives one better training in formal logic than what scientists typically get.
 
Grokmaster said:
The “insights of philosophers”, the physicist and Nobel laureate Steven Weinberg suggests, are “murky and inconsequential compared with the dazzling successes of physics and mathematics”.
Click to expand...

Philosophers are often murky, true. They are they that present their arguments badly, or have a poor argument to make. After all, philosophy is all about presenting your own argument and the reasoning for it.
Some philosophers make clear arguments (not many). They define, for example, what science is, and why it differs from religion. They define what mathematics is and why it's a closed system. They define what 'real' and 'reality' mean, and why there is no absolute 'real' or 'reality' (that branch of philosophy is called phenomenology).

Most philosophers don't really define anything, can't present their argument well, or have almost nothing for an argument to present. This is where the 'murkiness' comes from.

Now let's talk about the 'dazzling success of physics':

Like any other branch of science, physics is just a set of falsifiable theories. No theory is ever proven TRUE, since it is not possible to do so. Over the years, many theories of science were falsified (utterly destroyed) by a single piece of disproving evidence. One particularly good example of this destruction of a theory is the Theory of the Geocentric Universe, falsified by Galileo (who saw moons going around Jupiter). If moons are going around Jupiter, that blows the whole everything going around the Earth model completely. The entire model collapses, and the theory is now just garbage. To reconcile the two creates a paradox.

People have a natural tendency to group things. One common type of grouping is to look at successes and discard the failures. There are many failures in science (falsifications of theories). The ones that haven't been falsified yet are still theories of science. New ones are, of course, being created all the time. The ONLY requirement of a theory of science is that it must be falsifiable; that is, you must be able to run a test on the theory itself against it's null hypothesis. That test must be practical to conduct, be specific, and produce a specific result (usually a numeric one). As long as a theory can survive such tests, it is automatically part of the body of science. No voting bloc. No 'blessing' from the 'enlightened'. No politics. No religion. No people at all.

That theory will remain part of the body of science until and if it is falsified.

Thus, F=mA is a theory of science (expressed in mathematical form). This is Newton's Law of Motion. It is still a theory of science. No example that breaks this relation has ever been found. One came close, though, the observed orbit of Mercury, which didn't seem to follow this relation. Einstein explained why. The planet is where it should be, but we see it in a different location due to the gravity well of the nearby Sun creating a lens like bit of space to observe through. Mercury's orbit didn't falsify Newton's law, but only appeared to at times due to this lens affect. Thus, BOTH theories are theories of science. There never has been observed anything that violates Einstein's theory of space time and it's lens affect around any mass.

For any theory to exist, even a nonscientific one, it must first pass the internal consistency check. A theory is an explanatory argument. That argument cannot contain any fallacies. It must be a valid argument.

For any theory to be a theory of science, it must also pass an external consistency check. No theory of science may conflict with any other theory of science. One or both theories must otherwise be false.


Now let's talk about mathematics:

Mathematics is a closed functional system. That is, a system built on a set of founding rules that MUST be followed (called 'axioms'). It's like playing the rules of a game. If you change the rules, you are playing a different game.
Mathematics uses formal proofs to extend itself into all the various branches of mathematics in use today, but it starts and still must conform with those axioms. It cannot operate outside it.

Therefore, mathematics is only successes. Each expansion is conducted by a formal proof. Once done, that expansion continues to exist and always will.


Logic is exactly the same way. A closed system based on axioms and expanded by formal proofs. It too has only successes for the same reason.

Unfortunately, most grade schools, colleges and universities suck at teaching any of it. Their philosophy classes are a joke, they fail to teach mathematics (even fairly simple mathematics), they fail to teach science (even physics), and they fail to teach logic almost completely. There are some exceptions, of course, but it's largely become a wasteland due to religious interference from Democrats. Grade schools and even colleges and universities turn out graduates that can't even read or balance their own checkbooks or operate a till.
 
BidenPresident said:
Ignore then ban.
Click to expand...

As that philosophy & science of that not so good ole boys "serve the Pope or die" Christiananality pedophilia where if illegal alien invasions of South American drugs don't get that Zyklon - B effect for Christian Nation SCOTUS Fourth Reich July 9/11 patriot act .....there's always Islamidiotocracy "death to the infidels"....
 
Into the Night said:
It did, but science is not philosophy.
Click to expand...

There you go again demonstrating your near total ignorance of science and its history. Don’t you ever get tired of those who actually have studied and worked in science laughing at you?

I mean there isn’t a single person educated, trained and who works in science that just flat out is laughing at your near total ignorance on the subject.

Just so you know the word science is derived from the Latin word Scientia meaning “Knowing Something”. To the Romans scientia was synonymous with the Greek word philosophy (having wisdom).

So yea science is a philosophy. For many hundreds of years until the mid 19th century when the word Scientist was coined science was known as “Natural Philosophy”.

So why do you persist in your witless rants on the topic when it’s just so blatantly obvious you have never formally studied science and don’t have the first clue about science?

Or are you just trolling those of us who do just to give us a good laugh? ;-)
 
Mott the Hoople said:
There you go again demonstrating your near total ignorance of science and its history. Don’t you ever get tired of those who actually have studied and worked in science laughing at you?

I mean there isn’t a single person educated, trained and who works in science that just flat out is laughing at your near total ignorance on the subject.

Just so you know the word science is derived from the Latin word Scientia meaning “Knowing Something”. To the Romans scientia was synonymous with the Greek word philosophy (having wisdom).

So yea science is a philosophy. For many hundreds of years until the mid 19th century when the word Scientist was coined science was known as “Natural Philosophy”.

So why do you persist in your witless rants on the topic when it’s just so blatantly obvious you have never formally studied science and don’t have the first clue about science?

Or are you just trolling those of us who do just to give us a good laugh? ;-)
Click to expand...

Into the Night is a hate troll. 100% garbage.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
There you go again demonstrating your near total ignorance of science and its history.
Click to expand...
You are describing yourself again.
Mott the Hoople said:
Don’t you ever get tired of those who actually have studied and worked in science laughing at you?
Click to expand...
Science isn't a 'study' or a 'work'. Science is a set of falsifiable theories. Science isn't even people.
Mott the Hoople said:
I mean there isn’t a single person educated, trained and who works in science that just flat out is laughing at your near total ignorance on the subject.
Click to expand...
Science is not 'education', 'training', or a 'work'. Science cannot laugh. Science isn't a person. The ignorance is yours.
Mott the Hoople said:
Just so you know the word science is derived from the Latin word Scientia meaning “Knowing Something”. To the Romans scientia was synonymous with the Greek word philosophy (having wisdom).
Click to expand...
Science is defined by philosophy, Hoopie.
Mott the Hoople said:
So yea science is a philosophy.
Click to expand...
Science is not philosophy. Redefinition fallacy.
Mott the Hoople said:
For many hundreds of years until the mid 19th century when the word Scientist was coined science was known as “Natural Philosophy”.
Click to expand...
Science is not philosophy. Redefinition fallacy.
Mott the Hoople said:
So why do you persist in your witless rants on the topic when it’s just so blatantly obvious you have never formally studied science and don’t have the first clue about science?
Click to expand...
I happen to be a scientist, Hoopie. Science is not a 'formal study'. Science is a set of falsifiable theories.
 
Into the Night said:
You are describing yourself again.

Science isn't a 'study' or a 'work'. Science is a set of falsifiable theories. Science isn't even people.

Science is not 'education', 'training', or a 'work'. Science cannot laugh. Science isn't a person. The ignorance is yours.

Science is defined by philosophy, Hoopie.

Science is not philosophy. Redefinition fallacy.

Science is not philosophy. Redefinition fallacy.

I happen to be a scientist, Hoopie. Science is not a 'formal study'. Science is a set of falsifiable theories.
Click to expand...

Really? In what area?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top