I think you're fetishizing modern science a bit. Natural science is the observation of natural phenomena. The Scientific Method may be best practices, but it in no way changes what sort of knowledge it is. We didn't need a laminated poster with the Scientific Method written on it to make gunpowder or aqueducts.

Natural Philosophy and modern Empiricism can contain the same sorts of knowledge, the only difference being that Nat.Phil. tries to find the ultimate truth of this physics while Empiricism does not.

Korakys

New Zealand272 Posts

December 09 2016 20:42 GMT

#23

I don't think you could call philosophy or mathematics sciences, but I still think they are part of the same continuum.

Jerubaal

United States7684 Posts

December 09 2016 21:34 GMT

#24

Well why don't you share with us what they are then.

Korakys

New Zealand272 Posts

December 10 2016 08:52 GMT

#25

I would say they are a pair of unrelated Area of Critical Inquiry* isolates. They don't have family names because they are each the only one in their families.

*So, this is the ur-family name I just came up with. I'm bad at naming things.

Teoita

Italy12247 Posts

December 10 2016 09:21 GMT

#26

They aren't sciences because don't work anything like that that. Philosophy may (in part, not always) be based on observations of the world around you, sure, but it doesn't have the same relationship with observations that science does.

In philosophy you are never going to design and conduct actual experiments to gather data, nor will you try to explain the data you gathered from those experiments through a mathematical model, nor will you try to measure what your mathematical model predicts should happen in other situations, or try to refine or change the model if it appears to not work in some circumstance in which it should.

That doesn't make them any less valid than science. Besides, the scientific method itself uses math and was developed through philosophy, but it's a separate way of investigating the world.

opisska

Poland8852 Posts

December 10 2016 09:26 GMT

#27

What about https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Experimental_philosophy then?

I admit not having read much of the article or anything about it, but I am basically imagining people in white lab coats chaining innocent victims to railroad tracks.

Teoita

Italy12247 Posts

December 10 2016 09:34 GMT

#28

Uh, I didn't know that was a thing.

From what the wiki page says, I'm wondering what the difference between that and social sciences is. How would you even define the two? If you can't find a difference from social sciences, then i'd think that all they've done is simply rename one thing to the other.

opisska

Poland8852 Posts

December 10 2016 09:47 GMT

#29

I'm not claiming any understanding either. The only reason I knew to google "experimental philosophy" in answer to your post was that I heard a little about the concept when I was in spring in Dublin on a conference that was called "Contested Astrophysics" and ti was organised by people who proclaim themselves to be at least partly experimental philosophers. We, physicists, were invited not really as participants, but as experimental subjects - the goal of the group was to study "disagreement in science" and they asked us to present the most controversial talks possible and then there was ample room for discussion (that overrun the schedule heavily anyway). It was pretty successful I'd say, because disagreement was plentiful, but that was rather clear to me the moment i saw Etienne Parizot on the list of participants (if you don't know the guy, attend a talk of his if you run into it on a conference, he is really great in ruffling other people's feathers).

Thomasmarkle

United States85 Posts

December 11 2016 17:58 GMT

#30

I'm not a scientist or engineer or anything outside of a hobbyist. I love learning about anything and everything science (especially astronomy) so I easily see your points Teo. When people ask "whats the point," I would bet that almost all of the people asking that, are the ones worried about the monetary value. They dont care about the advances it has made in the past or the possibilities it has in the future, what they see is right now is, "money is being spent on stuff that inst giving me something immediately." When we are in a world that is surrounded by people who are very obsessed with quick returns on investments, they don't see the point in why money is being invested in certain sciences.

Of course this is just a theory and doesn't apply to all people. This is just something that I have found in my own experience of when people ask me that question. Its also very hard for me to answer that question since I am not in that field and its just a hobby for me so I don't have all the answers (and frankly I'm horrible with explaining things in the first place). So thank you for sharing your views and hopefully I will be able to convey them correctly to other people who don't understand how important sciences are.

Korakys

New Zealand272 Posts

December 13 2016 07:46 GMT

#31

I was watching a Think Big video about the guy who is working on an alternative "gravity as a derived force" theory. And they ask him that same damn question at the end: what is the point of your work? This guy is working so far beyond the bounds engineering today that it's completely pointless to ask him this. Of course he struggles to answer. They could have asked him a more useful question.

+ Show Spoiler +

mantequilla

Turkey781 Posts

December 14 2016 12:23 GMT

#32

astronomy ~= physics and physics is the only thing that can solve the biggest mysteries of existence.

I think people who live in order to just go on living don't get this and ask that kind of questions. For them playing the stock market is more useful.

We have bigger problems and bigger challenges but we can't focus on them because very few people can afford more than just staying alive.

Like DEATH, unlimited clean energy, brain to computer interface, very fast travel or not needing to travel at all?

instead we are cutting budget of space programs and spending that money to kill terrorists who are products of our self created artificial needs.

/--- end of rant transmission ---/