Philosophy vs faith subforums

[Coolydudey]

Did you find it rather surprising when you realised there are three times as many people reading the faith subforum than the philosophy one? I thought the split would render the faith subforum on the endangered species list. Guess we don't have that many philosophers here.

 

[Hawkeye]

As George Micheal once said...

Spoiler

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dEq6xVdvXBg

 

[Reluctantly]

Did you find it rather surprising when you realised there are three times as many people reading the faith subforum than the philosophy one? I thought the split would render the faith subforum on the endangered species list. Guess we don't have that many philosophers here.

Philosophy seems more often used to justify a person's own ideas, rather than to question them and understand their limits. People seem happier if they think they have the "best" answers or that they can find the "best" answers. Someone who then puts such notions into question isn't usually thought of as wise, nor openly appreciated for the wisdom such reasoning can bring.

 

[SpaceYeti]

Also, there's not really a lot to talk about in the subject of Philosophy which doesn't also, and possibly even harder, apply to another subject. Philosophy is more a tool you use to adjudicate other subjects. Like science minus the evidence.

 

[BigApplePi]

All philosophical questions have been answered. That's why.

 

[Reluctantly]

Also, there's not really a lot to talk about in the subject of Philosophy which doesn't also, and possibly even harder, apply to another subject.

How so?

Philosophy is more a tool you use to adjudicate other subjects. Like science minus the evidence.

Yup, just as I said...
"
Philosophy seems more often used to justify a person's own ideas, rather than to question them and understand their limits.
"

All philosophical questions have been answered. That's why.

Why is that? How do you know?

 

[walfin]

Philosophy is actually kind of boring if you ask me...

And also, we INTPs are not as well read as we'd like to be.

In any case, the philosophy that I am interested in is probably not what the forum is interested in (non-Confucianist Chinese philosophies).

 

[Reluctantly]

Philosophy is actually kind of boring if you ask me...

Why?

And also, we INTPs are not as well read as we'd like to be.

Then why no interest in philosophy? Or is that supposed to be the reason?

In any case, the philosophy that I am interested in is probably not what the forum is interested in (non-Confucianist Chinese philosophies).

And what philosophy is that?

 

[Hawkeye]

I find there is more negative pontification associated with philosophy. Also, I can't poke people with my smoking pipe on here either...

 

[Cognisant]

There's only a handful of people worth talking to about philosophy and I usually end up talking with them via PM, it doesn't bother me in the slightest that the philosophy board doesn't get as much attention, it's like if you go to a newsagent and compare the one or two philosophy mags to the rack of pseudoscientific drivel and the multiple racks of gossip/fashion drivel.

Popularity is certainly no sign of quality.

 

[Cherry Cola]

That's probably because philosophy tends to get pretty technical once you're past a certain level, and thats where most people (including me) stop progressing and lose interest.

Faith debates are always kept on a level that allows everyone to be included in the debate because.. well its faith.

 

[Cognisant]

 

[walfin]

Why?

There is no interesting fact that grabs your attention in philosophy, nothing counterintuive yet amazing and true in real life. Unlike the natural sciences or engineering.

Then why no interest in philosophy? Or is that supposed to be the reason?

That is the reason, because much of philosophy involves discussing the theories of others and one cannot critique them without having read them first.

And what philosophy is that?

Mo/Logician predominantly, a bit of legalism maybe. Although the egalitarian (as compared to Confucianism) views of the agriculturalists also interest me, it seems a bit proto-socialist.

 

[Reluctantly]

I find there is more negative pontification associated with philosophy. Also, I can't poke people with my smoking pipe on here either...

*Ahem*
"
Philosophy seems more often used to justify a person's own ideas, rather than to question them and understand their limits.
"

Do you like the irony?

There is no interesting fact that grabs your attention in philosophy, nothing counterintuive yet amazing and true in real life. Unlike the natural sciences or engineering.

I see. For me, although there's nothing directly applicable about learning it, it has helped me better understand the arguments people make and be better prepared to deal with them. I sort of always thought that was an INTP thing, but maybe most here don't care for it.

But I'm not sure how you got the idea that philosophy isn't true in real life. Historically, it's largely been a pursuit of truth in the face of unknowing, an aim to understand and clarify reality.
More practically though, it's equivalent to a blueprint for building a house; how the house will get built requires applicable science, but what it's built for as outlined in the blueprint is what's relevant to its purpose. Can science without a purpose be worth anything?

That is the reason, because much of philosophy involves discussing the theories of others and one cannot critique them without having read them first.

You don't have to though to get something out of philosophizing. Socrates is attributed with the quote "The unexamined life is not worth living." Do you disagree?

 

[therunningstick]

I feel like faith is the easier option because there is no convoluted route to the answer, there is only the answer. If you believe it's right, then it's right. I prefer philosophy because it questions the human thought process and attempts to find the reasoning behind the answers that we've just been given. An answer is infinitely more interesting when you know how you got there. Problem is, the process is very time consuming and philosophy has little to no practical applications. But it's still worth it to know ^^.

 

[Duxwing]

Also, there's not really a lot to talk about in the subject of Philosophy which doesn't also, and possibly even harder, apply to another subject. Philosophy is more a tool you use to adjudicate other subjects. Like science minus the evidence.

Science is really philosophy with evidence.

-Duxwing

 

[SpaceYeti]

How so?

Well, the schools of philosophy are;

1) Epistemology; The study of thought. I'd say this could be the purest form of philosophy, in that it overlaps the least with other subjects. The only other subjects interested in the topic is psychology/neuroscience, which is a significant competitor still.

2) Logic; Logic is absolutely nothing more or less than a tool used for helping to think/proceed clearly, and applies top every human activity imaginable.

3) Metaphysics; This subject competes with the basic principles of actual physics (time, reality, etc), and generally explains the subject poorly when compared to actual physics, and also encompasses religious subjects, which religion obviously also covers.

4) Moral and Political; This stuff obviously overlaps with politics and morality, and morality overlaps with politics and religion.

5) Aesthetics; This subject basically is art.

There's almost no philosophical subject which applies specifically to philosophy, instead of philosophy applying to the subject. There's nothing to really study about philosophy itself, it's simply thinking about a different subject. Logic is probably the only thing you'll ever really need to study about philosophy, because once you know logic, you can apply it to everything. Basically, philosophy is "thinking about junk". Just think about a subject long enough and you're philosophizing about it.

 

[SpaceYeti]

Science is really philosophy with evidence.

-Duxwing

Agreed, hence it being more useful.

 

[Duxwing]

*Ahem*
"
Philosophy seems more often used to justify a person's own ideas, rather than to question them and understand their limits.
"

Do you like the irony?



I see. For me, although there's nothing directly applicable about learning it, it has helped me better understand the arguments people make and be better prepared to deal with them. I sort of always thought that was an INTP thing, but maybe most here don't care for it.

But I'm not sure how you got the idea that philosophy isn't true in real life. Historically, it's largely been a pursuit of truth in the face of unknowing, an aim to understand and clarify reality.
More practically though, it's equivalent to a blueprint for building a house; how the house will get built requires applicable science, but what it's built for as outlined in the blueprint is what's relevant to its purpose. Can science without a purpose be worth anything?



You don't have to though to get something out of philosophizing. Socrates is attributed with the quote "The unexamined life is not worth living." Do you disagree?

Indeed, philosophy is the general case of all the sciences. It's the operating system for everything. And that's why it's so awesome.

-Duxwing

 

[Words]

Faith topics is the philosophy for the less intelligent. If you're more interested in that, then well you have to work on yourself. There is nothing interesting about "faith." The very idea of "faith" is counter to discussion and reason.

Also, is this a push for more philosophical topics? I've had so many ideas for threads but...i thought there were already too many philosophy topics. darn, i could've been more active years ago..wait, ah, maybe it's because they divided philosophy and faith and archived philosophy&faith. In any case, I see now that philosophy currently has the least amount of threads in the "within" section. I'm going to aim to push it to the top.

 

[SpaceYeti]

Why? Why not allow it to develop naturally? If it's worth making it because it's worth discussing, let it do it. It needs no unnatural push.

 

[BigApplePi]

Originally Posted by BigApplePi
All philosophical questions have been answered. That's why.

How so?

Most of them I know of have been addressed and answers one way or the other have been supplied. Why? You know any I've missed?

 

[BigApplePi]

Did you find it rather surprising when you realised there are three times as many people reading the faith subforum than the philosophy one? I thought the split would render the faith subforum on the endangered species list. Guess we don't have that many philosophers here.

How about? ...

Faith is living with answers while philosophy is for questioning those answers. Answers are preferred as then we believe we're doing the right thing; questions are for those who believe that needs a little refining.

 

[Words]

Why? Why not allow it to develop naturally? If it's worth making it because it's worth discussing, let it do it. It needs no unnatural push.

What is an "unnatural push"? Aren't all threads created by an "unnatural push"? What is "let it do it"?

Most of them I know of have been addressed and answers one way or the other have been supplied. Why? You know any I've missed?

Oh, there's many...I think.

 

[SpaceYeti]

What is an "unnatural push"? Aren't all threads created by an "unnatural push"? What is "let it do it"?

I mean; don't make threads only to increase the number of threads, as it will naturally water down worthwhile, interesting conversation.

 

[Coolydudey]

I mean; don't make threads only to increase the number of threads, as it will naturally water down worthwhile, interesting conversation.

What if he just pushes it at a rate that allows worthwhile conversation? I'd love that...

 

[walfin]

Can science without a purpose be worth anything?

Yes. Of course.

And I'd say most of philosophy is NF pontificating; I haven't seen any philosophy stuff written in Boolean algebra notation (which it can well be; or perhaps at least fuzzy logic algebra).

You don't have to though to get something out of philosophizing. Socrates is attributed with the quote "The unexamined life is not worth living." Do you disagree?

I disagree. Yay! An idea for a philosophy thread.

Indeed, philosophy is the general case of all the sciences. It's the operating system for everything. And that's why it's so awesome.

-Duxwing

No, it's like the BIOS. BIOSes are boring. Nobody gives a shit about the BIOS unless it fucks up mightily. The natural sciences & maths are more analogous to the OS with the applied stuff on top of that.

Even worse, it's like "the theory of BIOSes" or something like that.

Faith topics is the philosophy for the less intelligent. If you're more interested in that, then well you have to work on yourself. There is nothing interesting about "faith." The very idea of "faith" is counter to discussion and reason.

On the other hand, this forum proves otherwise.

Faith is easier to discuss. You just say "well that's OK" or "that's a stupid belief" or whatever, whereas it's impossible to discuss anything about philosophical stuff because you start questioning whether it makes sense to say something makes sense, and whether there is anything such as a stupid or a smart belief or even anything such as a belief or whether there is even anything being said.

 

[SpaceYeti]

What if he just pushes it at a rate that allows worthwhile conversation? I'd love that...

Then your mom.

 

[scorpiomover]

Did you find it rather surprising when you realised there are three times as many people reading the faith subforum than the philosophy one? I thought the split would render the faith subforum on the endangered species list. Guess we don't have that many philosophers here.

I'm not surprised at all. I was on another forum for years, before this one. The threads on G-d, religions and if evolution was true, would contain endless arguments, that ran on for hundreds of pages. The threads on really useful science, such as the discovery of lattices that could allow one to regrow lost limbs, barely made it to 2 pages.

People don't come to internet forums and discuss science, philosophy, or ideas, all that much, just like IRL. They come to internet forums and argue that their views are right, and others who don't share their views are ignorant, irrational, and morally inferior, and do so for ages and ages, on lots of posts and lots of threads, just like IRL.