Tags for This Article:

People (2215)  Democracy (1688)  Peace (1299)  Terrorism (880)  Laws (444)  Activism (288)  Activism (187)  Theories (94)  Philosophy Philosophical (75)  Science And Technology (68) 

Populum Tag Cloud
       Control Panel
Fine tune your search to access content
Articles
Diaries Products
Events All
All time
Last 6 mos
Last month
Last week
Last 24 hrs
From:
Month  Day   Year

To:
Month  Day   Year
Alphabet
Popularity
Count ON
Count OFF
This Level
Sub-levels

 

 

 

Tag(s): ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;
Add to My Group
July 24, 2007 at 22:16:17

Science and Philosophy

by Kamala Sarup     Page 1 of 1 page(s)

www.opednews.com

 

Tell A Friend

(0.0 from 0 ratings) View Ratings | Rate It

Science and Philosophy
Kamala Sarup

Philosophers have a method of analysis and a conception that when one speaks of concepts about the real world they talk about things that exist ; that is, occupy space inside the brain. In fact they talk only about concepts and their relationships. Definitions and deductive logic are their tools for understanding these relationships. The result is that the results of philosophy are formal (conceptual, analytic) truths, the same as mathematics. "Philosophers have personal sense-experiences about the real world, of course, like anyone else, but these are inadequate to make formal truths into real truths. Same for math". An American Economist Stanly said recently.

He further added "To arrive at empirical truths, one tests them against the sense-experiences of many people, thus providing real world samples, which allows for generalizations from samples, a process called induction or inductive reasoning. However, there is always the possibility that the generalizations of samples by induction can be wrong. That's inherent in the process. Therefore, all inductive conclusions must be accompanied by probabilities of being true or untrue, usually expressed as a number greater than 0, but less than 1. When rigorous mathematics is applied to sampling, the probabilities are called non-Bayesian probabilities. When the probabilities are subjective, they are called Bayesian probabilities". he added.

Science is based on (1) multiple observations (experiments), (2) deductive logic, and (3) inductive logic. Its empirical truths are always probable or improbable. There is no absolute certainty associated empirical truths, called conjectures or hypotheses when the evidence is small, theories when the evidence is better, and laws when the evidence is overwhelming.

Stanly said further "Philosophy never accepted experimentation and inductive logic. It continues to deal with formal truths. Outside of language use itself, have you ever heard of any original empirical truths determined by philosophy? Not likely you ever will. The "disconnect" is that formal truths determined through philosophy tell us nothing about empirical truths, i.e., truths about the "real world". OTOH, the empirical truths of science are legion. They often result in useful predictions about the real world.

"Can the formal truths of philosophy be tested by scientists to arrive at empirical truths? Not likely, because philosophers like concepts that are untestable and they don't like uncertainty. Thus, they talk of beauty and redness (universals) as though they exist when in fact they merely convey how people think about things.

Example: beauty does exist. It is accurate to say that people consider some action so abhorrent they call them beauty actions. You want to spend your time playing word-games like, "Can truth coexist?" since the entire statement are either meaningful or existent concepts? One can't have real certain reality; that doesn't exist, although many philosophers think it does. One can obtain only certain unreality (philosophy) or uncertainty reality (science).

"Long ago many men recognized the limitations of philosophy and turned to an alternate way of knowing about the real world as a way to determine truths, i.e. facts and relationships among facts about the real world. This method later was called science. The search continues in science for better and more truths. Meanwhile philosophers continue to argue over the same concepts since antiquity with nothing to show for truths except for a few improvements in the use of language. Those achievements having been accomplished, there is some productive left for philosophers to do and teach what they know to students about language, or like poets, play with and write about words". He said. Nepali journalist and story writer Kamala Sarup specializes in in-depth reporting and writing on peace, anti-war, women, terrorism, democracy, and development. Some of her publications are: Women's Empowerment in South Asia, Nepal (booklets); Prevention of Trafficking in Women Through Media, (book); Efforts to Prevent Trafficking in for Media Activism (media research). She has also written two collections of stories.  http://www.mediaforfreedom.com

 

kamala associates and writes for mediaforfreedom.com/. She is specializes in in-depth reporting and writing on peace, anti-war, women, terrorism, democracy, and development. Some of her publications are: Women's Empowerment in South Asia, (booklets); Prevention of Trafficking in Women Through Media, (book); Efforts to Prevent Trafficking in for Media Activism (media research). She has also written two collections of stories. http://www.mediaforfreedom.com/

Contact Author
Contact Editor
View Other Articles by Author

 

Bookmark this page: (what's this?)

NETSCAPE      DIGG THIS      Add This Page to Mr Wong!           NEWSVINE      DEl.ICIO.US      Looksmart Furl      My Web      Tag!RawSugar      Blink List     (More...)
Comments: Expand   Shrink   Hide  
4 comments

I am a simple man of eclectic interests and tastes with no particular academic credentials. I still perceive, think, read and write somewhat. Writing music is a hobby of mine

banned for abusive email to an editor

"Hoss" David P.I am a simple man of eclectic interests and tastes with no particular academic credentials. I still perceive, think, read and write somewhat. Writing music is a hobby of mine

banned for abusive email to an editor

Philosophy

Is God Empirical Science? Is there a "God" at all? What is certain about the Metaphysical? Unless you personally communicate with God.

Most Tech progress comes from Inventors and engineers. The true scientists. People who actually build something and somehow get it to work.

Looking at What it all means should be Philosophy or Religion. To say that orthodox Religion and institutional philosopy have failed, or worse are being used to manipulate and sell a particular "world" view is fair. What would you call that? It is what it is?  Reality? How about a manufactured reality? A maleable chameleon construct designed to fit the moment? Oh, I think it starting to sound more like politics. That can't be Science or Philosophy. But it is.

Some say that Einstein was the greatest Scientist ever. EVER!, they say.  There are those who say he was a useful tool for a particular political agenda. Probably both.

He liked Philosophy.

It was engineers and inventors that actually built the A-bomb and got it to work. Ok, Practical Scientists I suppose. As opposed to theoretical scientists. Who can sometimes be confused with philosophers or visionaries.

Deeper and Deeper

Tough nut to crack huh?  

by "Hoss" David P. (51 articles, 5 quicklinks, 14 diaries, 339 comments) on Wednesday, July 25, 2007 at 7:21:56 AM
 


Retired from the rat-race and now, with time, see the reality of what the activity really was.
GeraldoRetired from the rat-race and now, with time, see the reality of what the activity really was.

Yes, well -

Rather than going into realms of terminology to prove or disprove everything according to this school of 'thought' or that, wouldn't it be better first to acknowledge that reality exists apart from our recognition of it. - Clearly the Universe existed 'before' we were, and it will exist 'after' we are gone.

Having done that, we may then be able to understand of what that reality consists - A single ingredient or structure that we term 'space', of which single entity the effects of matter and its interlinking forces are all composed.  You can then see that the impression of 'time' as we know it is permitted by the process of our observation as chemical organisms. 

We can then discern what is real and what is unreal.  For instance, 'possibility' and 'probability' as such are fictions of our supposition, and have no existence in reality. - Will it rain tomorrow? - The 'probability' does not exist. In the reality of the event, the rain already exists tomorrow or it does not.  We just have to live long enough to see whether it exists or not.

The real Universe, of which we are simply a microscopic integral part in its process of completion, is in reality a single action tending to absolute simplicity, and without 'possibility' of being otherwise.  If it were possible to run the process of Universe a million times, it would have no other option than to happen in exactly the same way every time.  And although our innocent experience would lead us to observe otherwise - the Universe is already complete.  Clearly though, the Universe apart from our observation of it is apparently a very different place from the impression which our senses present to us.

Once you have established an appreciation of reality, you can then start to accept what is real and ignore what is unreal.  All we are doing until then is merely playing with our mental fingers, futilely readjusting our brain energy levels and confusing both ourselves and everyone else with the communication of our error.

However, if you want to believe and argue otherwise, that's quite alright by me.  And it keeps you out of mischief, I suppose . . .

by Geraldo (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 105 comments) on Wednesday, July 25, 2007 at 1:40:54 PM
 

 

4 comments

 

Tell A Friend

 


Copyright © OpEdNews, 2002-2008

Blog Ads

 

 

 

 

Most Popular Articles
(Most forwarded)

Are you ready for nuclear war? by Paul Craig Roberts

Loserville: Obama Is Channeling Kerry and Gore by Dave Lindorff

NSA MAY BE READING WINDOWS SOFTWARE IN YOUR COMPUTER by Sherwood Ross

"Caroline: Pull a Cheney!" An Open Letter to Caroline Kennedy (head of the Obama VP search team) by Michael Moore

Fresh New Discovery - Can You Guess What This Photo Is? by Meryl Ann Butler

Downsizing the News and Pretending to Increase Quality by Walter Brasch

The REAL John McCain by Mike Kuykendall

Pelosi Gets "Booked" & Confronts Her Own Past by Linda Milazzo

Mr. Bill: "OH NO, Fix the coast you broke, Shell Oil!" by Georgianne Nienaber

Whatever Happened to the Anger On the Left? by Marc McDonald

24 hrs 48 hrs
72 hrs 1 week
1 month 6 months
1 year All Time
Articles
Diaries Members
Products Events
Polls