28-02-2003 05:32									#301
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by Frogger NYE: "a rose by any other name" Physicists, mathematicians and modern philosophers all have their roots in the ancient study of "philosophy". But a man like Newton was a physicist and a mathematician first and foremost. His study of the subjects which are today considered part of philosophy was tangential and fairly useless. To say that philosophers of today have their existence justified by the work of a man who studied subjects which they are not competent in is to fall into the traps of a changing language...

You are well and truely mired in your own trap, Frogger. You are assuming that your view of the language is the only one to be applied to all cases through the ages.

The fact remains, as you have admitted, that from philosophy has come other useful disciplines. Why do you assume that this will not happen again in the future?

Oh, and there are some who know a great deal more about Newton and his times than you or I who would dispute that the other interests of Newton were of no consequence. Here is one that will amuse you.
http://www.semcoop.com/detail/073820143X

	28-02-2003 05:39									#302
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

What I'm saying is that when we use the word "philosophy" we should attempt to remain clear what sense we mean it in.

To reject "philosophy" (as used up to 1900) as useless is ridiculous, and gets rid of every physicist ever to live.

Rejecting "philosophy" (as used today) cannot be countered by the same argument. And when we use the word philosophy without quotations, it may just be me, but I assume we're using the modern meaning.

If philosophers of today want to justify their existence by recalling Newton then they'll have to train themselves as physicists, which they do not.

quote: Oh, and there are some who know a great deal more about Newton and his times than you or I who would dispute that the other interests of Newton were of no consequence. Here is one that will amuse you.

Come, now. I can find a book written by someone that will put forward almost any hypothesis you care to name. The fact is that there's no obvious connection between his theological and alchemical work and his work on physics and mathematics...

	28-02-2003 05:43									#303
	Remove this text

Just curious, do the philosophers here consider Charles Babbage to be a philosopher?

	28-02-2003 05:49									#304
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

No matter how you wish to split the term, fields of study which are not today within the discipline of philosophy were at one point part of that discipline.

What we consider to be philosophy today is irrelevant. Just as what people in the future will consider to be philosophy in their time, if the philosophers of today are working on something equally important, perhaps in the field of sentience and cognitve ability. It will be the discipline of philosophy today that is doing the service, along with others. Not the field which is yet to exist.

	28-02-2003 05:52									#305
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Originally posted by Asher Just curious, do the philosophers here consider Charles Babbage to be a philosopher?

He certainly was not a computer scientist.

	28-02-2003 05:54									#306
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

NYE, you're continuing to miss the point.

Just because "philosophy" kept the ancient term while physics and math went looking for their own terms does not mean that today's philosophers get to claim the achievements of other disciplines.

EDIT: by the way, I have no problem with philosophy as a subject in university. It's a damn sight better than a lot of other disciplines that have their own degrees...

	28-02-2003 05:54									#307
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by notyoueither He certainly was not a computer scientist.

How could he be a computer scientist when he was around well before the field of computer science existed?

He was a mathematician, he just happened to draw up the plans for the world's first digital computer well before they were possible in the early 1800s.

If we are even more anal with our definitions, computer scientists are mathematicians as well, rather than scientists.

	28-02-2003 06:15									#308
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by Frogger NYE, you're continuing to miss the point. Just because "philosophy" kept the ancient term while physics and math went looking for their own terms does not mean that today's philosophers get to claim the achievements of other disciplines. EDIT: by the way, I have no problem with philosophy as a subject in university. It's a damn sight better than a lot of other disciplines that have their own degrees...

I get your point, but you're missing mine in the context of this thread.

How about the terms Newton himself used? It would be useful to remember that in his time it was common for educated people to be familiar with all important areas of knowledge. He himself uses terms such as I have in this treatise cultivated mathematics so far as it regards philosophy by which he meant that he as applying mathematics to a field of study conventionally within the purview of philosophy, that being the nature of the universe.

There was no seperate discipline then. Science as such did not exist. It was all bound up with religious and philosophical views to that point. Newton was, as far as he himself explains, engaging in philosophy. So yes, philosophy gets to claim some acheivements when there was no field of physics existant to claim them.

So, in the context of this thread, philosophy was very useful. I would expect it to continue being useful as a field of study in the future, which I am sure you will not argue, but others may.

	28-02-2003 06:17									#309
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

The context of this thread never was about philosophy being useful in the past, although several attempts by several people have tried to turn it that way since it's much easier to prove that.

	28-02-2003 06:21									#310
	Inflate your Upload Space

Well, Asher. It seems to me that you have ignored any citation of it being useful in the present, or possibility of it being useful in the future.

It is perhaps good that the governments who fund higher institutions are dominated by people who have experienced the humanities.

	28-02-2003 06:21									#311
	Put an end to popups!

Why do you consider physics not to have existed at that point? Why is it that philosophy and science being all mixed up means that philosophy was the only one to exist?

And what happened is that the most useful, practical parts of philosophy which were actually getting somewhere picked themselves up and left. Philosophy's got no more claim to the whole than science does. And I don't see any scientists claiming that Moore's Utopia was actually a scientific treatise...because it wasn't and we've got better things to boast about.

	28-02-2003 06:24									#312
	Put an end to popups!

quote: It is perhaps good that the governments who fund higher institutions are dominated by people who have experienced the humanities

Hah. Politics is dominated by lawyers, and maybe things would be a lot better if it wasn't.

	28-02-2003 06:27									#313
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by notyoueither Well, Asher. It seems to me that you have ignored any citation of it being useful in the present, or possibility of it being useful in the future.

Can you please repeat those citations? I can't remember any serious ones.

I remember being told that it's "useful in educating people", or it's "helpful for the humanities", or something else incrediby vague...

quote: It is perhaps good that the governments who fund higher institutions are dominated by people who have experienced the humanities.

That would explain why 60% of all Federal funding goes to Humanities and Social Science research, with only 30% going to the Science council...

Pretty misguided if you ask me.

	28-02-2003 06:30									#314
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Frogger quote: It is perhaps good that the governments who fund higher institutions are dominated by people who have experienced the humanities Hah. Politics is dominated by lawyers, and maybe things would be a lot better if it wasn't.

What do you think lawyers study before law school? At least in the Americas.

	28-02-2003 06:31									#315
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Originally posted by notyoueither What do you think lawyers study before law school? At least in the Americas.

I thought it was obvious from his statement that he knows lawyers study SS/humanities before law, that's why he was saying it might be better if they didn't dominate politics.

	28-02-2003 06:32									#316
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

NYE, I'm aware of the usual education path...

	28-02-2003 06:34									#317
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

We could do with a government dominated by scientists. But those same scientists are usually busy with more worthwhile work. At least, the good ones are...

	28-02-2003 08:11									#318
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Originally posted by Frogger quote: I think this would have required monumental conceptual shifts and other difficulties As opposed to the conceptual shift required by the Lorentz transformations?

My remark was in the context of anti-realist conceptions of science, so I'm not sure what your point is here.

	28-02-2003 08:15									#319
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

quote: Originally posted by obiwan18 Agathon: There is another solution that harmonises your position with proper public funding. Not all research has a direct application, though future research will often rely upon a previously useless discovery. Therefore, it stands to reason that disinterested inquiry can produce definitive benefits not sought by the original researcher. This is why you fund philosophy, in that leaving the philosophers alone, they come up with something others find useful. No field can properly operate without some form of philosophy, be it ethics, or otherwise. In asking questions about these moral concepts, philosophers can unearth presuppositions and assumptions previously unchallenged. So there you go. Two 'real world' benefits of disinterested philosophical discourse.

Fair enough. I'd also add that the quest for knowledge can be regarded as an end in itself. A large number of people are just curious - I think that is one of our finest human attributes.

	28-02-2003 08:36									#320
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by Asher The context of this thread never was about philosophy being useful in the past, although several attempts by several people have tried to turn it that way since it's much easier to prove that.

It was in part because, in the absence of other arguments, the notion that it has been useful in the past is a good pointer to it being useful in the future. The problem with trying to point out contemporary philosophy which has had some effect on society is that philosophical revolutions tend to seep very slowly into the public conciousness. We are still, to a certain extent, playing out some of the changes inaugurated by the age of reason, by philosophers like Rousseau and Kant.

Here's a few examples of philosophy affecting contemporary issues (and not always for the better, I might add).

(1) The work of Will Kymlicka, a Canadian philosopher, is required reading for people that are going to deal with issues of multiculturalism. He is kind of the standard guy to read. I've come across him being mentioned in all sorts of areas outside philosophy.

(2) Rawls' theory of justice. Probably the most influential writings on justice in the 20th century, these are the backbone of the justification of welfare state capitalism as an economic and political system. Again, if you read books in political theory you will find Rawls name again and again.

(3) The later work of Ludwig Wittgenstein which inaugurated a whole new way of looking at language. There is an interesting dialogue between some of the people who study Wittgenstein and those who study the behaviour of primates.

(4) Peter Singer's book "Animal Liberation" (which I detest) - the bible of the animal rights movement.

(5) "Postmodernism". Again I detest this because I think it isn't real philosophy, but there is no doubt that charlatans like Derrida and Foucault have had immense influence on literature and the arts.

(6) The cognitive revolution. Philosophers have played a large role in this and cognitive science is part philosophy, part psychology, part computer science, without really being any one of them.

These are real effects. I'm not claiming that philosophy is the salvation of the world, but it has an important role to play, which is constantly changing. A hundred and fifty years ago, philosophers saw themselves as providing the world with metaphysical theories about the ultimate nature of reality. In the English speaking world that picture of philosophy has fallen out of favour. The current project of philosophy is largely that of conceptual analysis. Large scale theorising a la Plato or Kant has fallen out of favour. For example, there is a large literature on the concept of "cause" - trying to sort out a rationally satisfactory notion of cause has proved harder than people thought.

Other than this, philosophy departments are to an extent storehouses of the history of ideas. You mentioned somewhere that history was useful or we would be doomed to repeat it - that to me is a powerful reason for keeping people around who can say, read Plato in the original language, or explain how Hobbes was influenced by the political climate of his time. (if for no other reason to tell Frogger that his copy of the Republic is probably the diabolical Lee translation, which is extremely misleading).

I certainly don't think that we should have any more philosophy in universities (although I think courses in critical reasoning should be introduced in primary and high schools) so I am in the somewhat unique position of being an academic who doesn't think that his department should be given lots more money and take up a pre-eminent position in the university. We get quite enough. I happen to think that more needs to be put into pure science, so that science departments don't have to strike demonic bargains with outside companies.

But there you go, that's my opinion.

Anyway, Asher, let's ask you what the point of your research is.

	28-02-2003 08:43									#321
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: Anyway, Asher, let's ask you what the point of your research is.

I'm an undergrad, I don't do research.

And if you wonder what the point of research in computer science is, I'm wondering if you're trying to make a joke.

	28-02-2003 08:46									#322
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by Asher I'm an undergrad, I don't do research. And if you wonder what the point of research in computer science is, I'm wondering if you're trying to make a joke.

No, not really, I'm just interested. Most people think they have a good idea of what goes on in other people's disciplines when they don't really (witness some of the comments on philosophy from those who don't do it); so I am just interested.

I mean most people probably think that CS students sit around endlessly making little dots move across screens.

	28-02-2003 09:01									#323
	Get a bigger avatar today!

Whatever context it was said in,

quote: one reaction to the Michelson-Morley experiment would have been to complicate the ether theory in such a way as to keep it (I think this would have required monumental conceptual shifts and other difficulties)

Doesn't make sense as far as saying that dumping the ether was easier conceptually than accepting Lorentz transforms as true.

SR is simpler, but harder to understand than adapting ether-based transmission of light would have been...

	28-02-2003 09:07									#324
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

CS is a very new field, we're still making huge progress every year.

It depends on which discipline of CS on the type of research.

The theory people are working on much more efficient algorithms (almost all the algorithms we use today are incredibly inefficient still), looking at ways to represent different kinds of data in a computer,ways to test for computability (Turing was just the tip of the iceburg), computing on quantum computers, that kind of thing.

The graphics guys are developing new ways to do real-time 3D graphics on computers -- there's tremendous progress in this field in the past 10 years especially.

Then there's the study of AI, which is still in its infancy.

Distributed computing research, how to get computers working together across the globe...

Cryptography...

Human-Computer Interfaces (voice recognition, video recognition, UI design, 3D UIs, holographic display interaction, even "mind reading")

My university's compsci research page is here with more information: http://www.cpsc.ucalgary.ca/Research/

CS is one of the fields where private sector research is huge as well, and to see what they do in the private sector, here is a good start.... http://research.microsoft.com/research/projects/

	28-02-2003 09:07									#325
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Agathon I mean most people probably think that CS students sit around endlessly making little dots move across screens.

I thought that CS students sit around and figure out how to get members of the opposite sex to never talk to them.

	28-02-2003 09:11									#326
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Originally posted by Frogger Whatever context it was said in, quote: one reaction to the Michelson-Morley experiment would have been to complicate the ether theory in such a way as to keep it (I think this would have required monumental conceptual shifts and other difficulties) Doesn't make sense as far as saying that dumping the ether was easier conceptually than accepting Lorentz transforms as true. SR is simpler, but harder to understand than adapting ether-based transmission of light would have been...

I don't know. I think that there would have had to have been much revision given the results of the experiment. Perhaps that was a bad choice of example as it requires too much speculation. The mailbox example makes the same point with a mundane case.

It still doesn't affect my basic point, which is that an infinite number of theories will fit the observable facts - the basis of all good pragmatist philosophies of science.

	28-02-2003 09:12									#327
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

quote: Originally posted by Rogan Josh I am a doctor of philosophy. What's your problem?

Hey! Me too! I'm a MD - PhD.

	28-02-2003 09:13									#328
	Support Apolyton

quote: which is that an infinite number of theories will fit the observable facts - the basis of all good pragmatist philosophies of science

That's a great big "duh" for the same reason that I can draw an infinite number of curves through any set of points.

	28-02-2003 09:14									#329
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Asher CS is a very new field, we're still making huge progress every year. It depends on which discipline of CS on the type of research. The theory people are working on much more efficient algorithms (almost all the algorithms we use today are incredibly inefficient still), looking at ways to represent different kinds of data in a computer,ways to test for computability (Turing was just the tip of the iceburg), computing on quantum computers, that kind of thing. The graphics guys are developing new ways to do real-time 3D graphics on computers -- there's tremendous progress in this field in the past 10 years especially. Then there's the study of AI, which is still in its infancy. Distributed computing research, how to get computers working together across the globe... Cryptography... Human-Computer Interfaces (voice recognition, video recognition, UI design, 3D UIs, holographic display interaction, even "mind reading") My university's compsci research page is here with more information: http://www.cpsc.ucalgary.ca/Research/ CS is one of the fields where private sector research is huge as well, and to see what they do in the private sector, here is a good start.... http://research.microsoft.com/research/projects/

Sounds a lot like philosophy, in that the subject covers heaps of different areas. I'd be interested to see if a computer could pass the Turing test in my lifetime - I think it would make certain questions about the mind more pressing than they are now.

BTW - there is a mod that provides a 3D UI for OS X (it sucks though). What do you make of the "fuzzy logic" thing that was in vogue some years back?

	28-02-2003 09:15									#330
	Got spare money?

The odd thing is how simple most good theories tend to be. The more complicated you make them the more points they have to go wrong on...