|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
philsophy is really kind of seperate from science, unless you believe with quine that philosophy and science should be merged. as someone who studies philosophy I think you're being too hard on Tyson, I mean he's trying to explain it in a way that's interesting. If he just stated facts people would be confused and bored. plus I think it's pretty clear when he's talking about science and when its his opinion. if you're talking about people taking Tyson as the ultimate authority on everything I agree with you but that's not really his fault.
EDIT: Philosophy is interesting in its own right. The problem is when philosophers impose themselves on scientific questions, or vice versa I guess. At this point they are really dealing with two different types of questions, science deals with questions that have 'actual'/empirical answers while philosophy doesn't ^^.
this is a bit more complicated then this but I get what your saying. some philosophers say you should only talk about empirical things and that philosophy should be a kind of science (see quine). A lot of philosophers have attacked the entire philosophy of metaphysics claiming its meaningless/unknowable.
|
How does debating the intelligence of an astrophysicist pertain to American politics?
You stay classy, US Politics Megathread.
|
On October 30 2015 05:32 farvacola wrote:
I think that, in the general sense, it becomes much easier to ignore the plight of those on this earth when one does nothing but look at the stars. It is from that angle that I'd criticize Tyson.
this is so poetic <3
On October 30 2015 05:32 Karis Vas Ryaar wrote:
I was slightly off with size here's the quote. I suppose saying its impossible is a bit of a stretch. I don't know how it would be possible though
"Wood is not the best material for shipbuilding. It is not enough that a ship be built to hold together; it must also be sturdy enough that the changing stresses don't open gaps in its hull. Wood is simply not strong enough to prevent separation between the joints, especially in the heavy seas that the Ark would have encountered. The longest wooden ships in modern seas are about 300 feet, and these require reinforcing with iron straps and leak so badly they must be constantly pumped. The ark was 450 feet long [ Gen. 6:15]. Could an ark that size be made seaworthy?"
So there's something called a sewn-plank boat which was used in shipbuilding in the Indian Ocean and requires no iron. I am looking through my source and I couldn't find out how long was the maximum size, however. Perhaps not that long. It's an interesting question 
Also, with certain types of boats it's okay if they leak. I don't really understand the physics of it but that's what my book said.
On October 30 2015 05:32 MattBarry wrote:Show nested quote +On October 30 2015 05:21 notesfromunderground wrote:I don't believe in research. Is this stuff about fleish-kincaid reading level or something? That's as dumb as the Freedom Index measure :p. On October 30 2015 01:00 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On October 30 2015 00:56 notesfromunderground wrote:
I suspect that Fiorina was no better or worse CEO than any other idiot who has that job I feel like we can pretty much objectively say she was worse than the other CEOs, because the other CEOs still have a job and a company. She doesn't. She lost hers. I guess I think these things are a bit more arbitrary and random than you do. You realize that this same logic can be applied to say that people who are successful got that way because they were competent and worked hard and that not being successful is proof that you weren't and didn't  On October 30 2015 01:00 xDaunt wrote:On October 30 2015 00:56 notesfromunderground wrote:Fiorina and Trump are the only ones that when they talk, you know it is them talking. They can form English sentences independently. On October 30 2015 00:56 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On October 30 2015 00:52 notesfromunderground wrote:
That's a stupid hatchet job sort of claim. When she explained that "you don't know what being a CEO is like" that was pretty much the highlight of the debate. She understands how fucked up the system is. All I was thinking when she said that is "If you're going to cry about being a CEO of a business that you screwed up, just imagine trying to be the CEO of a country as fucked up and divided as this one." I don't think the "CEO of America" analogy makes any more sense than the "Household budget of America" analogy. I suspect that Fiorina was no better or worse CEO than any other idiot who has that job Cruz is probably the smartest of the bunch. Studies have shown that he speaks at the highest level of the candidates. I also think you're shortchanging Carson. From what I've seen of him, he's remarkably thoughtful. I don't believe "studies." See above. I think that I am personally a much better judge of intelligence than "studies." Carson is a complete moron, I have no idea why you would think that. He's not thoughtful he's just slow... On October 30 2015 01:43 farvacola wrote:
I think the topic of Ted Cruz's (and Carson's, for that matter) "intelligence" is an interesting opportunity for folks to confront the very real fact that many of the professions we are taught to associate with intelligence are, in fact, full of very skilled idiots. QFT On October 30 2015 05:11 Karis Vas Ryaar wrote:
you can't make a 350 foot vessel watertight without some sort of nails. I'm pretty sure this is not true. There's a really good book I read called "The Sea and Civilization" which talks about all kinds of ship construction in the Indian Ocean which didn't use nails. Perhaps they were not 350 footers but I think they were pretty big. You might be surprised! On October 30 2015 05:16 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On October 30 2015 04:55 Introvert wrote:
Tyson is his own brand of idiot, so I suppose I get your perspective on that (not mine). At least I think. By brand of idiot you mean godsend to astrophysics and science education? If you actually mean that NdGT is an idiot, I would like you to please elaborate. He's an utter moron. He's one of those people who raises Science to the level of religious idolatry. It's really embarrassing. You sound like a pretentious 14 year old.
NO U!!!!
|
notesfromunderground has to be a philosophy teacher or something ^^! i keed i keed
No but really what do you teach?
|
On October 30 2015 05:45 always_winter wrote:
How does debating the intelligence of an astrophysicist pertain to American politics?
You stay classy, US Politics Megathread.
I think it was: Ben Carson -> Ben Carson vs. NdGT in cage fight -> "They're both idiots" -> "Why is NdGT an idiot?" -> "Don't trust experts or facts or anything." -> Where we are now.
|
On October 30 2015 05:47 Kickstart wrote:
notesfromtheunderground has to be a philosophy teacher or something ^^! i keed i keed
No but really what do you teach?
I'm a PhD student in an "interdisciplinary humanities program." So... philosophy Mainly I'm interested in economic history and monetary theory (these days at least). I'm on fellowship this year so I don't have to teach, thank god.
|
Tyson, Adam Savage and Bill Nye are all trying to promote science through media, which is under appreciated by a lot of people. Bringing the a little wonder and joy into the field of science for the public to enjoy has never been a bad thing.
|
On October 30 2015 05:47 Kickstart wrote:
notesfromunderground has to be a philosophy teacher or something ^^! i keed i keed
No but really what do you teach?
There is literally no way he teaches anything. He's pretty much the opposite of an educator.
How could he be an educator? That would imply he was some sort of authority or expert in something, and he explicitly said that those kinds of people are to not be trusted. What a weird class that would be, to be the teacher but insist that the class not listen to anything you had to say.
|
On October 30 2015 05:42 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On October 30 2015 05:38 Introvert wrote:
Tyson does the Carl Sagan thing of making science mystical. Moreover, he's a fan of scientism and completly dimisses, for instance, the use and purpose of philosophy. He's cringeworthy because he's more of a celebrity than a scientist, and consistently speaks on things he is wholly ignorant about. Such as?
I'm out so I can't find exact quotes, but he's said such things about philosophy repeatedly. He essentially says it's useless. I've listened to his podcast a number of times, and when he wanders off from talking about things that are explicitly scientific, he sounds silly.
|
On October 30 2015 05:49 Plansix wrote:
Tyson, Adam Savage and Bill Nye are all trying to promote science through media, which is under appreciated by a lot of people. Bringing the a little wonder and joy into the field of science for the public to enjoy has never been a bad thing.
Especially when science education isn't generally "trusted" by a large percentage of the American public, because of religious biases. Good science education and making it seem interesting and cool and popular is a necessity in this country.
|
To be fair, trusting/putting in power 'intellectual types" (philosopher kings) is an age old question that is fairly relevant to politics  . So we are kind of on topic.
|
I teach my students not to trust me because they shouldn't trust anybody. If you think that makes me "not an educator," then you must also think that Socrates was "not an educator."
On October 30 2015 05:50 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:]
What a weird class that would be, to be the teacher but insist that the class not listen to anything you had to say.
if you are a teacher and your class is NOT like this, then you are a bad teacher and dishonest to boot.
|
On October 30 2015 05:51 Introvert wrote:Show nested quote +On October 30 2015 05:42 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On October 30 2015 05:38 Introvert wrote:
Tyson does the Carl Sagan thing of making science mystical. Moreover, he's a fan of scientism and completly dimisses, for instance, the use and purpose of philosophy. He's cringeworthy because he's more of a celebrity than a scientist, and consistently speaks on things he is wholly ignorant about. Such as? I'm out so I can't find exact quotes, but he's said such things about philosophy repeatedly. He essentially says it's useless. I've listened to his podcast a number of times, and when he wanders off from talking about things that are explicitly scientific, he sounds silly.
Okay, I'd be interested in hearing/ reading whether or not he was speaking as an authority on that subject or just giving his opinion as a layman.
|
On October 30 2015 05:51 notesfromunderground wrote:
I teach my students not to trust me because they shouldn't trust anybody. If you think that makes me "not an educator," then you must also think that Socrates was "not an educator."
If you are responding to my question I said no such thing about you not being an educator nor did I imply it. I just asked what subject you teach :/
|
On October 30 2015 05:53 Kickstart wrote:Show nested quote +On October 30 2015 05:51 notesfromunderground wrote:
I teach my students not to trust me because they shouldn't trust anybody. If you think that makes me "not an educator," then you must also think that Socrates was "not an educator." If you are responding to my question I said no such thing about you not being an educator nor did I imply it. I just asked what subject you teach :/
nope, not you. we cool
|
I get what your saying about Tyson and I don't necessarily agree. although I agree that treating science as some sort of religious entity has problems. I like reading Tyson's science even if I don't agree with him on more of the subjective elements.
as for boats leaking, yeah its not necessarily a problem if you can pump it out, but on a boat with 8 people and hundreds of animals, you probably don't have a lot of time to pump water. There's a lot of scientific problems with the arc story. fun talk.
this whole argumetn reminds me of some conservative guy who said "I'd rather trust the US government to the first 300 people in the New York phonebook then to the members of the Harvard Law review". or something like that, I don't remember the exact quote.
|
On October 30 2015 05:51 notesfromunderground wrote:I teach my students not to trust me because they shouldn't trust anybody. If you think that makes me "not an educator," then you must also think that Socrates was "not an educator." Show nested quote +On October 30 2015 05:50 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:]
What a weird class that would be, to be the teacher but insist that the class not listen to anything you had to say. if you are a teacher and your class is NOT like this, then you are a bad teacher and dishonest to boot.
I hope all of you are paying attention. Very imporant lessons are being taught here.
And that same lesson is directly applicable to the cult of science referenced earlier.
|
On October 30 2015 05:54 notesfromunderground wrote:Show nested quote +On October 30 2015 05:53 Kickstart wrote:On October 30 2015 05:51 notesfromunderground wrote:
I teach my students not to trust me because they shouldn't trust anybody. If you think that makes me "not an educator," then you must also think that Socrates was "not an educator." If you are responding to my question I said no such thing about you not being an educator nor did I imply it. I just asked what subject you teach :/ nope, not you. we cool
Cool cool. I'm with you to a degree. Questioning things is in my mind the basis of 'learning'. Knowing WHY something is the way it is and going through that process of discovery is much more interesting and rewarding than just being told that something is the way that it is. That said, there are still experts on topics that are 'authorities' on things in their fields :/.
EDIT:
Being the cynic I am, I just tend to think that the real reason people are so intent on saying science isn't an authority on anything is so that they can try to discredit things like global warming/evolution/etc etc etc. Such people are annoying~
|
On October 30 2015 05:51 notesfromunderground wrote:I teach my students not to trust me because they shouldn't trust anybody. If you think that makes me "not an educator," then you must also think that Socrates was "not an educator." Show nested quote +On October 30 2015 05:50 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:]
What a weird class that would be, to be the teacher but insist that the class not listen to anything you had to say. if you are a teacher and your class is NOT like this, then you are a bad teacher and dishonest to boot.
Yeah no. Nice try though. It's not "trust no one/ no facts/ no reason/ no experts/ nothing at all". That is not the same as healthy skepticism, because you're not evaluating anyone's claims or any data- you're dismissing anything without even reading through it.
Your perspective is very much like a Young Earth Creationist's, in the sense that they claim that their bullshit is "just skepticism" or that we should "teach the controversy" and that we shouldn't "listen to experts or facts"... all the while they already have their own absurd agenda to push.
Don't try to strawman your own absurd position into a promotion of critical thinking and problem solving for students, because that is not what you were just peddling. Immediate rejection of everything for no reason is just as bad as immediate acceptance of everything. Students need to do research and work to understand things, whether you like it or not.
|
On October 30 2015 05:51 notesfromunderground wrote:I teach my students not to trust me because they shouldn't trust anybody. If you think that makes me "not an educator," then you must also think that Socrates was "not an educator." Show nested quote +On October 30 2015 05:50 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:]
What a weird class that would be, to be the teacher but insist that the class not listen to anything you had to say. if you are a teacher and your class is NOT like this, then you are a bad teacher and dishonest to boot.
As someone who was a teacher for a little while, you are full of shit. Of course, I though high school, so I didn't have the benefit you had of everyone doing the hard work for me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
