Haha, o boy, I was fearing this... (EDIT: I see some uglier postings have been deleted while posting this
turbo said:
Early on, "philosophy" was a term used to apply against all sciences. Nowadays, the term "philosophy" is used to describe studies in comparative religion and more speculative studies, such as ethics. We need to differentiate the meanings on that historical time-line and in popular usage.
I think philosophy has
always been speculative. Once it stops being speculative, it starts a new branch of science. Philosophy is the science breeder, and we, as all children, are unappreciative of our parents. The challenge is not too regard all philosophy as the same bunch: there are some philosophers who treat it as the academic branch that it is, and there are some who have respect for Deepak Chopra.
obis said:
Right now science is not advanced enough to try to relate quantum physics to psychology (make psychological predictions based on quantum mechanical computations), however, since philosophy is less rigorous, there's more freedom, hence philosophy can attempt to relate them, in some relatively meaningful way.
*ducks*
You're on physicsforum.com! I realize that there is a chance you're not a crackpot, but your sentence can
easily be read as if you were. But in a sense I agree with you: the philosophy of physics, for example, occupies themselves with what quantum mechanics, if universally true, would imply about the human mind, but I do think it's a bad example to give cause it's such an abused topic (cf. my Deepak Chopra remark above).
jaja1990 said:
Advances, as in "useful advances". For example, Using Physics theories and laws, now we have computers to help us with our everyday life, letting us discuss the usefulness of Philosophy while we could be thousands of miles away.
Does Philosophy help humanity like Physics does? Does it make similar (in amount) advances?
Phew, hard one. Even though I favour philosophy, I would say the shortest answer is "no". The somewhat longer answer is "not in
that sense, philosophy brings about other changes, much more subtle, but then again, in the bigger picture of things, at least as important and sometimes more important: philosophy gave birth to things like science, and as noted by Turbo a great part of philosophy is ethics, which has been very important (just think of "human rights"), it has lead to
new ways of thinking which in the end influence how everyone lives their lifes, it has shaped and sometimes even created politics, it has created the enlightenment, etc. It's hard to see how much we've been influenced by philosophy, cause it's such a
slow procedure, contrary to your examples, but the reason is simply because it goes much deeper.
Some might say "well that was the role of philosophy in the past, but it's over now", but I think that is what every generation has thought, again, I think, because philosophy works so slow that you don't notice its effects like in other disciplines. A good way to discover its effects is, of course, to study it ;)
That being said, I also agree with micromass:
micromass said:
But anyway: if you want to be a philosopher of a science (math, physics, biology, etc.), then you should major in that science and not in philosophy. Later on you can always do philosophy. Or you can double major in the science and in philosophy.
On a personal note: this year I had to apply to graduate school and I considered the Oxford http://www.philosophy.ox.ac.uk/admissions/graduate/mst_in_philosophy_of_physics and asked my "favourite" professor his opinion on it (someone I knew also had an interest in such matters) and he suggested me to wait with such things and first focus on the physics itself before you philosophize about it. I now agree with him (and I'm still planning to do that master one day).
