Philosophy is useless

[Satyr]

Science is the application of philosophical concepts.
It is a byproduct of a particular branch of philosophy or a particular attitude and way of looking at the world.

[Thundril]

I agree that philosophy could be deemed "useless" in some narrow, practical sense, just like art, music, poetry, religion and sports could be deemed "useless". But I would like to propose that only such "useless" activities are truly meaningful in a human sense.

As humans, we do all the useful, necessary stuff in order to make time for activities that give life meaning, things that are ends in themselves. Any animal can gather food and procreate. Which, when you think about it, is rather pointless unless it leads to something more.

Being human, as opposed to being an animal or a plant, is to reflect upon existence, to ask questions that have no answer. In that way, philosophy is the art of being human in its most refined form.

THIS!

[ForgedinHell]

Science is the application of philosophical concepts.
It is a byproduct of a particular branch of philosophy or a particular attitude and way of looking at the world.

Science is science, not philosophy; otherwise, people graduating with philosophy degrees would be suited to work at CERN as physicists, or build computers, or cure disease, etc. Trying to justify the existence of philosophy at this juncture by claiming it gets credit for science, and by extension, people wasting their time studying non-scientific philosophy get credit for being useful makes no sense.

[ForgedinHell]

I agree that philosophy could be deemed "useless" in some narrow, practical sense, just like art, music, poetry, religion and sports could be deemed "useless". But I would like to propose that only such "useless" activities are truly meaningful in a human sense.

As humans, we do all the useful, necessary stuff in order to make time for activities that give life meaning, things that are ends in themselves. Any animal can gather food and procreate. Which, when you think about it, is rather pointless unless it leads to something more.

Being human, as opposed to being an animal or a plant, is to reflect upon existence, to ask questions that have no answer. In that way, philosophy is the art of being human in its most refined form.

THIS!

I did state it has some entertainment value, but if that is all philosophy is then it is the equivalent to playing checkers.

[Satyr]

Science is science, not philosophy; otherwise, people graduating with philosophy degrees would be suited to work at CERN as physicists, or build computers, or cure disease, etc. Trying to justify the existence of philosophy at this juncture by claiming it gets credit for science, and by extension, people wasting their time studying non-scientific philosophy get credit for being useful makes no sense.

Once more you prove your quality.
Turd, please never change.


Define 1 for me.
It should be easy.

Then show me a one outside your tiny little brain.
Show me an indivisible singularity.

Then wonder, you stupid fuck, why do I take it for granted that 1 and 0 are codes that define existence.

Science, Turd, is directly linked to a perspective of reality.
It has its own presumptions...this is why, you stupid fuck, it is seeking for the "God particle" and uses metaphors like Big Bang to represent absolutes...and why for it a beginning and an end are out there.

Turd, to harmonize modern Quantum Physics with the physics science, Newtonian Physics, is built upon human brains are now using metaphors denoting activity with no thingness, like a Vibrating String or waves that become particles when you observe them, and they still find the universe counter-intuitive as they call it.

Turd, philosophy is the love of wisdom...and since exemplifies this love, you stupid imbecile.
We all have philosophy, even a dumb turd, like you, because we all have a way of looking at the world and a way of understanding it and a way of evaluating it.

Turd, there is philosophy outside schools and books.
With philosophy the object of investigation is the world, which is also the object of investigation for science, you stupid fuck.

Just because you and your ilk cannot practice philosophy outside academics or rely on others to guide you....seeing the world through other people's perspectives, does not make philosophy, thinking, worthless.
What is worthless is the kind of thinking you turds indulge in...which is really parroting.

[Satyr]

Some quotes for the turd, because cutting and pasting is all the energy and time I can offer this piece of genetic garbage.
There is a reason why the sciences flourished in ancient Greece and many were invented there. The reason was based on the Hellenic attitude concerning life and the world.

Science is philosophy given flesh and bones, made material.
Religion is philosophy made ethereal, spiritual....pure mind.

Thus a man who thinks for himself only subsequently becomes acquainted with the authorities for his opinions when they serve merely to confirm him therein and to encourage him.
The book-philosopher, on the other hand, starts from those authorities in that he constructs for himself an entire system from the opinions of others which he has collected in the course of his reading.

There is no science but that of the general.

Pinker argues that modern science has challenged three ‘linked dogmas’ that constitute the dominant view of human nature in intellectual life:

-The Blank Slate (the mind has no innate traits) — empiricism
- The Noble Savage (people are born good and corrupted by society) — romanticism
-The Ghost in the Machine (each of us has a soul that makes choices free from biology) — mind/body dualism.

The term ‘physics’, in its original and etymological sense, means precisely the ‘science of nature’ without qualifications; it is therefore the science that deals with the most general laws of ‘becoming’, for ‘nature’ and ‘becoming’ are in reality synonymous, and it was thus that the Greeks, and notably Aristotle, understood this science. If there are more specialized sciences dealing with the same order of reality, they can amount to no more that ‘specifications’ of physics, dealing with one or another more narrowly defined sphere.

Already, therefore, one can see the significant deviation of meaning to which the modern world has subjected the word ‘physics’, using it to designate exclusively one particular science among others, all of which are equally natural sciences, and this is an example of that process of subdivision we have already mentioned as being one of the characteristics of modern science.
This ‘specialization’, arising from an analytical attitude of mind, has been pushed to such a point that those who have undergone its influence are incapable of conceiving of a science that deals with nature in its entirety. Some of the drawbacks of this specialization have not passed altogether unnoticed, especially the narrowness of outlook that is its inevitable outcome; but even those who perceive this most clearly seem nonetheless resigned to accept it as a necessary evil entailed by the accumulation of detailed knowledge such as no man could hope to take in at once; on the one hand, they have been unable to perceive that this detailed knowledge is insignificant itself and not worth the sacrifice of synthetic knowledge which it entails, for synthetic knowledge, though this too is restricted to what is relative, is nevertheless of a much higher order; and on the other hand, they have failed to see that the impossibility of unifying the multiplicity of this detailed knowledge is due only to their refusal to attach it to a higher principle; in other words, it is due to a persistence in proceeding from below and from outside, whereas it is the opposite method that would be necessary if one wishes to have a science of any real speculative value.

Like dreams, statistics are a form of wish fulfillment.

Science today betrays its origins and denies its own acquisitions in allowing itself to be put to the service of State terrorism and the desire for power. Its punishment and its degradation lie in only being able to produce, in an abstract world, the means of destruction and enslavement. But when the limit is reached, science will perhaps serve the individual rebellion. This terrible necessity will mark the decisive turning-point.

Much literary criticism comes from people for whom extreme specialization is a cover for either grave cerebral inadequacy or terminal laziness, the latter being a much cherished aspect of academic freedom.

The history of philosophy, of the sciences, of religion, all show that opinions are spread abroad on a quantitative scale and that the leading position always goes to what is easier to grasp, that is, to whatever is easier and more comfortable for the human spirit. Indeed, the man who has fully educated and developed himself in a higher sense can always reckon to have the majority against him.

Science is nothing but developed perception, interpreted intent, common sense rounded out and minutely articulated.

[quote="Kant, Immanuel""]Science is organized knowledge. Wisdom is organized life.[/quote]

[Atthet]

Philosophy is useless to those who astutely and proudly refuse to think for themselves. Most participants in philosophy forums, ironically, least belong on them. This demonstrates the fact that for every thinker, and master of his own life, there are dozens and hundreds of slaves and followers, who will never garnish a gram of their own authority in life. Because this is true, the majority of morons will only regurgitate quotes from famous philosophers, or others in general, as their demonstrative "philosophy" in life.

It is a copy of somebody else's thoughts, beliefs, and aspirations. This makes mental slavery possible and demonstrative. The slave mentality is rampant on forums like these, countless slaves begging for an intellectual master, or at least, intellectually mastery of any kind, including the most distant fantasy of a possibility.

This is the birth of every idealism.

[ForgedinHell]

Philosophy is useless to those who astutely and proudly refuse to think for themselves. Most participants in philosophy forums, ironically, least belong on them. This demonstrates the fact that for every thinker, and master of his own life, there are dozens and hundreds of slaves and followers, who will never garnish a gram of their own authority in life. Because this is true, the majority of morons will only regurgitate quotes from famous philosophers, or others in general, as their demonstrative "philosophy" in life.

It is a copy of somebody else's thoughts, beliefs, and aspirations. This makes mental slavery possible and demonstrative. The slave mentality is rampant on forums like these, countless slaves begging for an intellectual master, or at least, intellectually mastery of any kind, including the most distant fantasy of a possibility.

This is the birth of every idealism.

Well, if you are taking the position that philosophy is useless for those who refuse to think for themselves, then aren't you contradicting yourself? If someone did accept an argument, that was valid, even if they didn't give it much thought, wouldn't the acceptance of that idea or argument be an improvement over not learning philosophy at all?

And if one thinks for themselves, but they are lousy at it, how does that make them better off?

[Satyr]

The Turd wants a reason to think...after he is told what to think.

This is like the Christian who must have a God to give his life meaning and make his need/suffering tolerable.

The Turd wants to protect the herd form their own stupidity:

And if one thinks for themselves, but they are lousy at it, how does that make them better off?

How does it protect the many who cannot think for themselves, the turd asks, wanting advice for himself, no doubt.

Who will protect the stupid, the morons, the weak, the idiot?
How will they be "better off"?

[tbieter]

I agree that philosophy could be deemed "useless" in some narrow, practical sense, just like art, music, poetry, religion and sports could be deemed "useless". But I would like to propose that only such "useless" activities are truly meaningful in a human sense.

As humans, we do all the useful, necessary stuff in order to make time for activities that give life meaning, things that are ends in themselves. Any animal can gather food and procreate. Which, when you think about it, is rather pointless unless it leads to something more.

Being human, as opposed to being an animal or a plant, is to reflect upon existence, to ask questions that have no answer. In that way, philosophy is the art of being human in its most refined form.

Well said!

[Thundril]

I did state it has some entertainment value, but if that is all philosophy is then it is the equivalent to playing checkers.

Yes.

[ForgedinHell]

I did state it has some entertainment value, but if that is all philosophy is then it is the equivalent to playing checkers.

Yes.

LOL. Well, then I'll take the opposite position in my post titled something like "Philosophy is one of the Greatest Disciplines to Learn."

[Satyr]

What a perfect turn of events.

Here we have multiple turds frequenting a forum dedicated, supposedly, to philosophy, admitting that they are incapable of appreciating or practicing philosophy, unable to find an application for it, and stating that this amounts to them "playing checkers".

To a mind unable to appreciate or play chess I guess checkers is a more simple alternative to constant losses.

To such genetic filth the conclusions are already established and all of this discussion is for naught. You see, these pieces of feces and byproducts of human sheltering have already accepted the "self-evident" truths of what the world is and about how it should function. All of this is simply them wasting time, or pretending to themselves that they've questioned their own morals and ideals.
They were expecting feel-good results and enlightenment that was not going to be so insulting and hard to swallow.

The leveling of man continues.

[Atthet]

Well, if you are taking the position that philosophy is useless for those who refuse to think for themselves, then aren't you contradicting yourself?

Implication is the most subtle form of accusation.

Your question implies, and therefore accuses, that I do not already think for myself.

If someone did accept an argument, that was valid, even if they didn't give it much thought, wouldn't the acceptance of that idea or argument be an improvement over not learning philosophy at all?

Philosophy is nothing more than validation and self-gratification for you.

And if one thinks for themselves, but they are lousy at it, how does that make them better off?

Being retarded and genetic feces left to fend for itself in the wild, is a much better start and improvement than protection of this genetic filth, inside the walls of civilization, where it cannot be recycled, but instead molds, festers, and rots. We could compare the black plague of Europe to a memetic plague inhabiting the western world today. People are brain dead, zombies. No more is this apparent than on these "philosophy" forums, where thought and "free thinking" is rarest of all.

[mickthinks]

LOL - it's probably worth pointing out that many of us (most of us, I think) find Satyr's style of communication unsatisfactory and don't bother with him. By all means try and make it work for you but don't feel bad if you come to the same conclusion as we did.

Mick