1
   

What is the Empirical World?

 
 
Kielicious
 
  1  
Reply Mon 11 Jan, 2010 03:44 am
@kennethamy,
kennethamy;119104 wrote:

Planck and Einstein made physical discoveries, not philosophical discoveries.

Authority from one field does not automatically transfer over into another field. Planck and Einstein were no more philosophical authorities than then were English literature authorities.


It doesnt matter if they are philosophers or not.

Discoveries in science can directly affect philosophical positions.
kennethamy
 
  1  
Reply Mon 11 Jan, 2010 07:12 am
@Kielicious,
Kielicious;119129 wrote:
It doesnt matter if they are philosophers or not.

Discoveries in science can directly affect philosophical positions.


Are there philosophical positions, but no philosophers?
Kielicious
 
  1  
Reply Mon 11 Jan, 2010 06:16 pm
@kennethamy,
kennethamy;119139 wrote:
Are there philosophical positions, but no philosophers?



Some philosophers are stubburn and they wont change their mind no matter what is shown to them.

Thats why I said what I did.
kennethamy
 
  1  
Reply Mon 11 Jan, 2010 06:25 pm
@Kielicious,
Kielicious;119257 wrote:
Some philosophers are stubburn and they wont change their mind no matter what is shown to them.

Thats why I said what I did.


There are lots of people like that. I would think that there are fewer philosophers. What things were you thinking of showing philosophers, and about what?
Kielicious
 
  1  
Reply Mon 11 Jan, 2010 06:56 pm
@kennethamy,
kennethamy;119260 wrote:
There are lots of people like that. I would think that there are fewer philosophers. What things were you thinking of showing philosophers, and about what?



I wouldnt be showing them something they havent already been exposed to -- in one way or another. The point is that science directly influences philosophical positions because, after all, what happens if evidence is shown otherwise? The position loses credibility. Vitalism, dualism, creationism, etc. were all 'philosophical positions' that were all more widely believed to be true in their respective day-n-age, but were pretty much overturned when science had its say.
kennethamy
 
  1  
Reply Tue 12 Jan, 2010 07:18 am
@Kielicious,
Kielicious;119273 wrote:
I wouldnt be showing them something they havent already been exposed to -- in one way or another. The point is that science directly influences philosophical positions because, after all, what happens if evidence is shown otherwise? The position loses credibility. Vitalism, dualism, creationism, etc. were all 'philosophical positions' that were all more widely believed to be true in their respective day-n-age, but were pretty much overturned when science had its say.


All I said was that philosophical positions usually have philosophers to take them. Henri Bergson was a vitalist. Descartes, a dualist. And so on. Of course, it is not clear whether vitalism or dualism are philosophical or scientific positions.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

How can we be sure? - Discussion by Raishu-tensho
Proof of nonexistence of free will - Discussion by litewave
Destroy My Belief System, Please! - Discussion by Thomas
Star Wars in Philosophy. - Discussion by Logicus
Existence of Everything. - Discussion by Logicus
Is it better to be feared or loved? - Discussion by Black King
Paradigm shifts - Question by Cyracuz
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 12/27/2024 at 04:03:23