Quantcast
Is Philosophy Useful?

Forums - General Discussion - Is Philosophy Useful?

Is Philosophy useful?

Yes - It shapes worldview... 11 57.89%
 
No - It's too abstract w... 3 15.79%
 
Sort of - It develops cri... 5 26.32%
 
Other/in between/see results 0 0.00%
 
Total:19
Jay520 said:
Skidonti said:

Philosophy is a highly reasoned and logical approach to behavior and creating a system of values for oneself and for society in its government; it is key to having an examined life.



The thing is, these skills can be obtained without ever formally studying philosophy.

A whole lot of skills can be obtained without formal study. Formal study is supposed to accelerate the process so you can come up with new stuff.
But I'm not talking about the value of learning philosophy in university for skills (I wouldn't be a philosophy major either), I'm talking about the value of philosophy in general to a person.  A person should reason their ethics and ideal behavior for themselves, and come together to reason it for their society, and that IS philosophy.

I'd say the thing Neil Degrasse Tyson wants more than anything, if he hasn't stated as such himself already, is for every up and coming bright young mind to be a scientist. Or, it seems more specifically, a scientist dedicated to advancing technology. Without putting together a defense right now, I just don't think that's... reasonable. Or necessary.



Around the Network

Philosophy is very important in a lot of areas, and it has shaped so much of the world we live in today, and the world we will live in tomorrow.

In my Computer Science university course there was a huge overlap in materials from what I covered in two philosophy modules, a neuroscience module, a biocomputing module, an intelligent systems module, and an image processing module.

Much of the technological advancement we're seeing at the moment in fields such as facial, voice, and handwriting recognition, to just plain better search algorithms at Google, and Netflix's suggested movies feature, all stems from ideas covered in philosophical concepts such as philosophy of mind and intelligence.

I'd imagine that philosophy holds great importance in other STEM fields, as well as social sciences like economics and political science,



Skidonti said:
Jay520 said:
Skidonti said:

Philosophy is a highly reasoned and logical approach to behavior and creating a system of values for oneself and for society in its government; it is key to having an examined life.



The thing is, these skills can be obtained without ever formally studying philosophy.

A whole lot of skills can be obtained without formal study. Formal study is supposed to accelerate the process so you can come up with new stuff.
But I'm not talking about the value of learning philosophy in university for skills (I wouldn't be a philosophy major either), I'm talking about the value of philosophy in general to a person.  A person should reason their ethics and ideal behavior for themselves, and come together to reason it for their society, and that IS philosophy.

I'd say the thing Neil Degrasse Tyson wants more than anything, if he hasn't stated as such himself already, is for every up and coming bright young mind to be a scientist. Or, it seems more specifically, a scientist dedicated to advancing technology. Without putting together a defense right now, I just don't think that's... reasonable. Or necessary.



Yes, that is philosophy. But I'm pretty sure Tyson isn't claiming that reasoning one's ethics and ideal behavior is useless. Considering the context, it seems that he's talking about the formal study of philosophy...it would be quite silly if he advocated against reasoned thinking in general.

As for that first sentence, I would argue otherwise. You can't learn mathematics without actually studying mathematics, you can't learn astronomy without actually trying to study astronomy, etc. This isn't so much the case with philosophy: you could learn critical thinking skills via mathematics, an argumentative writing class, etc. Hell, you could even develop it by studying astrophysics, which is even more evidence that Tyson isn't advocating against the critical thinking developed by philosophy...as he would be advocating against his own field of study.

I don't think Tyson wants every bright kid to be a scientist, at least not by profession.

Skidonti said:

I fear becoming too science centric in education. I feel that devalues all things not "science". You know, the opinion "all bright students should study science foremost and not philosophy or other lower crap". I think that's off base and dismissive if that's really what people believe.

What is science without philosophy and ethics? Philosophy isn't some arbitrary set of rules like religion. Where does that mildly idiotic comparison even come from? Philosophy is a highly reasoned and logical approach to behavior and creating a system of values for oneself and for society in its government; it is key to having an examined life. If someone thinks science can have much value without some philosophy then I believe they are overstepping the definition of science.

Science is just a type of imperical method of investigation. Another part of a well examined life. I wouldn't call it a replacement for philosophy in any way. 

Sure they are.

They're completely arbitrary created based on the thinking of the person who comes up with their own rules.   Only given importance by the original who believes it.

In anyones personal ethics you can find a huge mound of contradictions, and random arbitrary nonsense.



Skidonti said:
Jay520 said:
Skidonti said:

Philosophy is a highly reasoned and logical approach to behavior and creating a system of values for oneself and for society in its government; it is key to having an examined life.



The thing is, these skills can be obtained without ever formally studying philosophy.

A whole lot of skills can be obtained without formal study. Formal study is supposed to accelerate the process so you can come up with new stuff.
But I'm not talking about the value of learning philosophy in university for skills (I wouldn't be a philosophy major either), I'm talking about the value of philosophy in general to a person.  A person should reason their ethics and ideal behavior for themselves, and come together to reason it for their society, and that IS philosophy.

I'd say the thing Neil Degrasse Tyson wants more than anything, if he hasn't stated as such himself already, is for every up and coming bright young mind to be a scientist. Or, it seems more specifically, a scientist dedicated to advancing technology. Without putting together a defense right now, I just don't think that's... reasonable. Or necessary.

I disagree.   He doesn't want every up and coming bright young mind to be a scientist.  

He just wants every bright young mind to do something... useful. 

 

I'm sure he'd have no problems with bright people being accountants or travel agents or whatever.  Just something that serves a point other then inflating ones own self opinon.

 

Hell, what to study ethics and how the world works?   Pick something like Sociology.



Around the Network
Kasz216 said:



Philosophy more or less serves the same purpose as religion, except instead of being tribute to a mystical unknowing force... it's a tribute to ones own ego.

Totally stealing that.

 

 

Anyhow, I'm with Tyson. It's a largely-useless exercise, really only fit for mental masturbation.