|
What's your favorite science? (pg. 8)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| RJT |
| quote: | Originally posted by KiNeTiC ENeRgY
I got a degree in Microbiology and a minor in Chemistry, though I despise chemistry. Physics was ok, but I hate doing tons of math. Biology and electronics, though electronics is not really a science per say is what I like the most. The math involved is not too bad. |
I have a hard time believing any educated person would act like you do.
| quote: | Originally posted by KiNeTiC ENeRgY
LOL @ philosphy...sounds lucrative in the real world. |
Terrific for me then that I didn't go to school to make money.
Keep trying, Jr. You'll make it out of your folks place some day.  |
|
|
| gehzumteufel |
| quote: | Originally posted by RJT
Philosophy of science is maybe one of my favorite fields, but I've always got the sense that people within the scientific community have always resented those of us on the outside making any comment. |
I personally think it would be related to the fact that when you are making comments on someting that you know nothing about. (this is not saying you specifically, but the philosophy community in general) Like some philosopher making some comment about how to better design an internal combustion engine, when they have no clue what even goes into designing one as it is. I could be way off, but that would be my thought. |
|
|
| NeoPhono |
| Pharmacology and Physiology, although theoretical physics is nice to keep the mind nimble. |
|
|
| Meat187 |
| quote: | Originally posted by RJT
Yup, agreed 100%.
I have to ask though, how do you feel about philosophers sense of entitlement to comment on science and how its conducted?
:conf:
Philosophy of science is maybe one of my favorite fields, but I've always got the sense that people within the scientific community have always resented those of us on the outside making any comment. |
That's hard to say, and I need to go to bed. ;)
I guess it depends on the specific comment. Certainly science is a field that should be discussed by philosophy but I just don't know enough about philosophy of science to comment on this. |
|
|
| MrJiveBoJingles |
| quote: | Originally posted by RJT
Philosophy of science is maybe one of my favorite fields, but I've always got the sense that people within the scientific community have always resented those of us on the outside making any comment. |
I think they resent it most when it's obvious that the philosopher doesn't know jack about the science. Especially when the guy who doesn't know jack is trying "invalidate" or "critique" conclusions that the scientists make. |
|
|
| RickyM |
| quote: | Originally posted by RJT
Technically what you've described is called inductive logic, and it's a perfectly valid form of reasoning, so long as one can provide adequate evidence to draw an inductive inference regarding the truth value of the given conclusion.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inductive_logic
Creation science may attempt to use an inductive inference, but it's logically impossible for them to find adequate evidence to prove their position - so it's just an invalid argument regardless of form.
:) |
It's not a valid form of reasoning if you ignore all evidence which contradicts the original conclusion...which is what these fools do.
But thanks for the link...I always like reading stuff from David Hume. |
|
|
| gehzumteufel |
| quote: | Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles
I think they resent it most when it's obvious that the philosopher doesn't know jack about the science. Especially when the guy who doesn't know jack is trying "invalidate" or "critique" conclusions that the scientists make. |
Spoken much better than my response a few posts up. :) |
|
|
| MrJiveBoJingles |
Also, I think there's a belief among some scientists that a lot of people who take up philosophy want the appearance of intellectual rigor and depth without having to do much hard work.
;) |
|
|
| RJT |
| quote: | Originally posted by gehzumteufel
I personally think it would be related to the fact that when you are making comments on someting that you know nothing about. (this is not saying you specifically, but the philosophy community in general) Like some philosopher making some comment about how to better design an internal combustion engine, when they have no clue what even goes into designing one as it is. I could be way off, but that would be my thought. |
I think you misunderstand what the point of philosophy of science is. No commentator on the philosophy of science would ever say anything like that though, as it's entirely outside the realm of philosophy of science.
Philosophy of science has to do with method and validity, as well as how arguments are rationalized and justified.
Commentary will never have to do with specifics of design and generally has more to do with ethical problems and assessing objectivity (as well as the possibility of objectivity).
The wiki page is a decent place to start if you want a bare bones introduction to the subject: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_science |
|
|
| basd |
Mathematics.
I often wish I had chosen to study mathematics instead of computer science. |
|
|
| RJT |
| quote: | Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles
Also, I think there's a belief among some scientists that a lot of people who take up philosophy want the appearance of intellectual rigor and depth without having to do much hard work.
;) |
As the bulk of philosophy of science is going to have to deal with ethics and logic, I'd pretty much defy any "scientist" to take up the "You're doing jack!" line and then proceed to attempt to grasp exactly why the conclusions they come to are sound.
;)
Good scientists make friends with philosophers, bad scientists are just trying to cover their tracks. :p |
|
|
| Sunsnail |
| quote: | Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles
I agree.
I also don't think math is a science, either. |
Oh? Can you explain why you think that? |
|
|
|
|
