25-02-2003 05:38									#31
	Remove this text

So why is it the programs you mention have lower entrance requirements, if on average they are smarter?

I certainly don't consider people who major in philosophy to be that bright in general. That would be why it's laughed at by people who may be studying something in a somewhat...I don't know, real field.

Philosophy funding should be slashed, it's totally and completely useless and sucks up funds from more necessary fields.

As a computer science student I was forced to take two philosophy courses, and they've been filled with nothing but common sense and semantics which waste everyone's time.

The only job someone with a philosophy degree can do is teach philosophy to others, and the only reason people take philosophy is for the GPA boost.

	25-02-2003 05:38									#32
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Originally posted by Japher If there isn't a right answer then how can there be a wrong answer?

There can be better and worse answers. For example, quantum mechanics is a better answer to the question "how does the world work" than the statement "because God makes it work."

Anyway, if you believe that you know there are no right and wrong answers, haven't you contradicted yourself since you seem to think you know the answer to the question, "Are there any right and wrong answers"?

["Pass that man the hemlock!", cried the mob.]

	25-02-2003 05:41									#33
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by Agathon In my experience computer science and mathematics students tend to be excellent logicians but not so good at ethics or political philosophy.

That would explain why of my two Philosophy of Logic classes, the philosophy majors were consistently at the bottom of the class. The only people ever to ask questions tended to be the same three kids, all of which were philosophy majors, all of which asked the most inane, obvious questions I've ever heard in a college classroom...

And for the record, that course was taught by a guy who originally got a philosophy PhD (Berkeley, I don't know if that's a good Philosophy school or not), told us all that he considered it a mistake, and then got a CS masters. He's a very bright guy though, 27 years old, two masters and 1 PhD...He's taught at Stanford and University of Technology in Vienna as well.

	25-02-2003 05:50									#34
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Originally posted by Asher So why is it the programs you mention have lower entrance requirements, if on average they are smarter? I certainly don't consider people who major in philosophy to be that bright in general. That would be why it's laughed at by people who may be studying something in a somewhat...I don't know, real field.

Are you talking about graduate school or undergraduate work - that is like the difference between amateur and professional boxing. Philosophy is a "real field" within the academy, it is things like "media design" and "management" that have no place there. A university is supposed to be a place of disinterested inquiry first and not a job training centre.

quote: Philosophy funding should be slashed, it's totally and completely useless and sucks up funds from more necessary fields.

I pointed out some uses for it in an earlier post. If you think that so called "useless" fields should be slashed then that would eliminate large chunks of most universities. Unless you give some account of what you mean by "useless" I can't even accept this as an argument.

Besides, philosophers are really cheap so you wouldn't save that much money. We certainly don't need elaborate or expensive equipment - we get by with these strange things called "books".

quote: As a computer science student I was forced to take two philosophy courses, and they've been filled with nothing but common sense and semantics which waste everyone's time.

What were these? Logic? I agree that undergraduate logic is far from interesting, but it is useful if you go on in the philosophy of Language. Perhaps you just went to a lousy school.

quote: The only job someone with a philosophy degree can do is teach philosophy to others, and the only reason people take philosophy is for the GPA boost.

Balderdash. Most of the people in my current class took it because they want to learn about it. They most certainly did not take it for the GPA boost since hardly anyone is doing that well on it. Yet 3/4 of the students have stuck out the course past the drop date.

Again I put it to you that you go to a mickey mouse school which does not run courses to a respectable standard. That's the only explanation for the GPA boost notion. In fact if students at my institution wanted to get a GPA boost I would advise them not to take philosophy.

	25-02-2003 05:50									#35
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Originally posted by Agathon There can be better and worse answers. For example, quantum mechanics is a better answer to the question "how does the world work" than the statement "because God makes it work."

That would be because the latter statement is wrong.

quote: Anyway, if you believe that you know there are no right and wrong answers, haven't you contradicted yourself since you seem to think you know the answer to the question, "Are there any right and wrong answers"?

Is this a trick question?

He doesn't believe that himself, he was refuting you...

	25-02-2003 05:53									#36
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Originally posted by Asher That would explain why of my two Philosophy of Logic classes, the philosophy majors were consistently at the bottom of the class. The only people ever to ask questions tended to be the same three kids, all of which were philosophy majors, all of which asked the most inane, obvious questions I've ever heard in a college classroom... And for the record, that course was taught by a guy who originally got a philosophy PhD (Berkeley, I don't know if that's a good Philosophy school or not), told us all that he considered it a mistake, and then got a CS masters. He's a very bright guy though, 27 years old, two masters and 1 PhD...He's taught at Stanford and University of Technology in Vienna as well.

Berkeley is an excellent school, not for what I do, but an excellent school nonetheless. Some people aren't really cut out for it - I know several people who have PhDs in other disciplines but who threw them over for philosophy - this just happens.

BTW what did they ask?

I am aware that many undergrad phil majors are time wasters but these people get weeded out by grad school which leaves us with people like your former lecturer.

And "well-known" is an Americanism, is it not?

	25-02-2003 05:55									#37
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Agathon I pointed out some uses for it in an earlier post.

And I still think the uses you listed are grasping at straws and certainly don't require their own department, and certainly shouldn't be giving out PhDs for it...

quote: If you think that so called "useless" fields should be slashed then that would eliminate large chunks of most universities.

Isn't that the point, though? It's fine if it's a private institution, public institutions shouldn't be wasting the people's money teaching something that doesn't contribute anything to the society, despite the attempts of the majors in those fields to argue otherwise.

quote: Besides, philosophers are really cheap so you wouldn't save that much money. We certainly don't need elaborate or expensive equipment - we get by with these strange things called "books".

Professors, classroom space, etc. -- all of those aren't cheap.

quote: What were these? Logic? I agree that undergraduate logic is far from interesting, but it is useful if you go on in the philosophy of Language.

Explain to me how that would be useful at all...

quote: Again I put it to you that you go to a mickey mouse school which does not run courses to a respectable standard. That's the only explanation for the GPA boost notion. In fact if students at my institution wanted to get a GPA boost I would advise them not to take philosophy.

Man, you're so high on yourself...

Philosophy is completely useless. Completely. You've not given any real "uses" for it in this thread, just lame attempts to make it sound useful...

Philosophy should be developed by your own personal experience, not dictated to you by some academic.

	25-02-2003 06:00									#38
	Remove this text

quote: Originally posted by Agathon BTW what did they ask?

To tell you the truth, I don't even remember. It was last year.
I do remember all of my CS friends rolling their eyes constantly in the class though...

quote: And "well-known" is an Americanism, is it not?

I should hope not, because it's also taught like that in Canada as well. "high-ranking", "well-known", and the like are grammatically correct, "high ranking" and "well known" are not.

	25-02-2003 06:04									#39
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote: Originally posted by Asher That would be because the latter statement is wrong.

Both can be construed as explanatory hypotheses, the former is clearly the more useful explanation. If you are a pragmatist and think that "useful" approximates "true" the argument would be even stronger. Similarly with evolution and intelligent design et al.

quote: Is this a trick question? He doesn't believe that himself, he was refuting you...

But if it was true, it must be false. Surely you studied the liar paradox if you did logic - it is similar to this.

	25-02-2003 06:05									#40
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Asher To tell you the truth, I don't even remember. It was last year. I do remember all of my CS friends rolling their eyes constantly in the class though...

Perhaps they didn't understand the question.

quote: I should hope not, because it's also taught like that in Canada as well. "high-ranking", "well-known", and the like are grammatically correct, "high ranking" and "well known" are not.

The Canadian spelling system is a hybrid of the American and English systems. I can provide you with more examples if you like.

	25-02-2003 06:07									#41
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Asher And for the record, that course was taught by a guy who originally got a philosophy PhD (Berkeley, I don't know if that's a good Philosophy school or not), told us all that he considered it a mistake, and then got a CS masters. He's a very bright guy though, 27 years old, two masters and 1 PhD...He's taught at Stanford and University of Technology in Vienna as well.

Bright as this guy might be, he certainly failed in his job: after two courses you didn't get any appreciation of philosophy whatsoever.

	25-02-2003 06:10									#42
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by Asher Philosophy is completely useless. Completely. You've not given any real "uses" for it in this thread, just lame attempts to make it sound useful... Philosophy should be developed by your own personal experience, not dictated to you by some academic.

The last statement is particularly risible. Studying philosophy is one way to make this process more efficient since you don't have to start from nothing. You admit that you haven't studied anything other than logic so it's not clear that you have any idea what you are talking about.

Anyway, you are up to your usual tricks - you haven't answered my question and told me what you mean by "useful". I certainly find philosophy useful everyday, but you seem to be using the term in a different sense. Please elaborate.

	25-02-2003 06:10									#43
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

"
That would be because the latter statement is wrong. "

Can you prove that? Why shouldn't we simply assume the latter statement as correct?

"It's fine if it's a private institution, public institutions shouldn't be wasting the people's money teaching something that doesn't contribute anything to the society, despite the attempts of the majors in those fields to argue otherwise."

So then what about blue sky pursuit of knowledge in the hard sciences, information that can increase our understanding of the universe and its laws but not nessecarily have direct benefit to society. The purpose of universities isn't to try to provide a direct benefit society but to pursue knowledge.

	25-02-2003 06:18									#44
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Originally posted by Shi Huangdi " That would be because the latter statement is wrong. " Can you prove that? Why shouldn't we simply assume the latter statement as correct? "It's fine if it's a private institution, public institutions shouldn't be wasting the people's money teaching something that doesn't contribute anything to the society, despite the attempts of the majors in those fields to argue otherwise." So then what about blue sky pursuit of knowledge in the hard sciences, information that can increase our understanding of the universe and its laws but not nessecarily have direct benefit to society. The purpose of universities isn't to try to provide a direct benefit society but to pursue knowledge.

Nice one

	25-02-2003 06:20									#45
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote: Originally posted by The Vagabond Bright as this guy might be, he certainly failed in his job: after two courses you didn't get any appreciation of philosophy whatsoever.

That's a bit unfair - someone would have to be a triple genius with cherries on top to be able to do this in formal logic. It's a lot easier when you are teaching The Republic.

	25-02-2003 06:38									#46
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

I did philosophy in high school, and it's well worth a look. I also did it for a couple of years in university (Scottish universities have an unusual course structure), and it was nice and easy because I'd already got the basics under my belt.

Philosophy does make it much easier to create convincing arguments. For that, it's useful.

	25-02-2003 06:58									#47
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Originally posted by Agathon Anyway, you are up to your usual tricks - you haven't answered my question and told me what you mean by "useful". I certainly find philosophy useful everyday, but you seem to be using the term in a different sense. Please elaborate.

You're up to your usual tricks, you ask a question and proclaim any responses to it as not answering the question...

It's not useful because it doesn't get you a job in the real world or contribute to society. It doesn't improve research in any fields, it doesn't provide any benefit at all other than being "interesting" for some people.

quote: Can you prove that? Why shouldn't we simply assume the latter statement as correct?

You can't prove it, but you can't disprove it either.
There's zero evidence suggesting God exists, plenty suggesting he does not, but no proof either way.

I was just trolling.

quote: So then what about blue sky pursuit of knowledge in the hard sciences, information that can increase our understanding of the universe and its laws but not nessecarily have direct benefit to society. The purpose of universities isn't to try to provide a direct benefit society but to pursue knowledge.

Ah, clever trick.
The purpose of public universities is to pursue knowledge that would benefit the public. In some areas, this includes obscure research (mathematics, biology, chemistry, physics, etc.) that are not directly applicable to the public but eventually do benefit society in numerous ways.

Please give me a couple cases where philosophy has benefitted society, and I'll give you cases where physics, biology, chemistry, computer science, engineering, etc. have all benefitted society.

Would that be fair?

	25-02-2003 07:09									#48
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Asher, perhaps you won't object that philosophy benefits mathematics, physics, social sciences, etc. But mathematics, physics and social sciences obviously all benefit society. Then it follows that philosophy benefits society. Proof completed.

	25-02-2003 07:11									#49
	Inflate your Upload Space

None of the philosophers I know were any good at physics or math. They seemed to be good at constructing fraudulent proofs with the aid of faulty logic and convenient axioms.

Which isn't surprising, given their forebears.

	25-02-2003 07:11									#50
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Originally posted by The Vagabond Asher, perhaps you won't object that philosophy benefits mathematics, physics, social sciences, etc. But mathematics, physics and social sciences obviously all benefit society. Then it follows that philosophy benefits society. Proof completed.

Except I would object that philosophy benefits those fields.

If anything, philosophy borrows heavily from those fields, not vice versa. FOL is like a very primitive relational programming language from Lady Lovelace's era.

Sure, centuries ago philosophers were important, but not these days...

	25-02-2003 07:18									#51
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Frogger None of the philosophers I know were any good at physics or math. They seemed to be good at constructing fraudulent proofs with the aid of faulty logic and convenient axioms.

So you had a bad luck with philosophers. The best philosophers come from physics. Philosophers coming from the humanities are usually not so bright, although there are exceptions.

It's not a problem with philosophy as such. It's a problem of good and bad philosophers.

	25-02-2003 07:20									#52
	Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by Asher Except I would object that philosophy benefits those fields.

Good. So the field of our discussion narrows down.

	25-02-2003 07:21									#53
	Full PM-box? Change here!

The problem with philosophy these days is it's not making any progress. It's not going anywhere.

It's the pursuit of semantics under the guise of knowledge.

	25-02-2003 07:30									#54
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Asher It's the pursuit of semantics under the guise of knowledge.

It's what a bad philosophy does. A good philosophy uncovers interrelation between seemingly unrelated things. And for that purpose, it has to use/introduce some general notions/concepts which can easily be confused with semantics.

	25-02-2003 07:34									#55
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

Asher, just out of curiosity, do you know the first law of dialectics, which states that quantity turns into quality and vice versa?

	25-02-2003 07:41									#56
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by The Vagabond A good philosophy uncovers interrelation between seemingly unrelated things.

That's called data mining in my field. And amazingly, it's actually very useful. But as a CS field, not as an abstract philosophy field...

quote: Asher, just out of curiosity, do you know the first law of dialectics, which states that quantity turns into quality and vice versa?

Exhibit A regarding uselessness...

	25-02-2003 07:45									#57
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Asher You're up to your usual tricks, you ask a question and proclaim any responses to it as not answering the question... It's not useful because it doesn't get you a job in the real world or contribute to society. It doesn't improve research in any fields, it doesn't provide any benefit at all other than being "interesting" for some people.

The latter is simply untrue, but the other poster pointed this out. Anyway, only what is useless has real value since the useful is useful for something and this is either useful for something else or something that is worthwhile in itself, and thus not useful.

And the notion of universities not being part of the "real world" is absurd.

quote: You can't prove it, but you can't disprove it either. There's zero evidence suggesting God exists, plenty suggesting he does not, but no proof either way.

That's not the point of the example. The point of the example is that we have two hypotheses adduced to explain the evidence. Both do the job of explanation but the former does it better than the latter. The actual existence of the hypothesised entities is besides the point. I for one am wary of asserting the existence of explanatory entities non-hypothetically for the simple reason that scientific orthodoxy changes rapidly and today's ultimate particles are tomorrow's phlogiston.

quote: Please give me a couple cases where philosophy has benefitted society, and I'll give you cases where physics, biology, chemistry, computer science, engineering, etc. have all benefitted society.

You stupid idiot.

The following were invented or discovered by philosophers or by people who were basically doing philosophy.

The systemisation of formal logic - Aristotle.
The invention of political science - Aristotle
The formulation of the first systems of rational explanation of phenomena - The Presocratics, Plato, Aristotle.
The notion of a professional public service - Plato
Utopianism - Plato
The notion of abstract ideas - Plato
Universals - Plato
The philosophical groundwork for Christian theology - Plato, Aristotle
The notion of state provided education for boys and girls - Plato
The invention of meterology, biology, literary criticism, etc. - Aristotle
The notion of a cosmopolitan society - Zeno of Citium, Chrysippus
The university - Plato
Atomic theory - Democritus and Leucippus.
Evolution - Empedocles
Natural law - the Stoics (Zeno, Chrysippys, et al)
The notion of certainty as the fundamental ground of inquiry (Al Ghazali, Descartes)
The US Constitution - borrows heavily from the work of John Locke.
Every major political theory. (Hobbes, Plato, Aristotle, Locke, Rousseau, etc.). Meaning : Conservatism, Libertarianism, Socialism, Communism, Welfare Liberalism, the Social Contract, etc. etc.
Scepticism - Pyrrho, Sextus Empircus, Hume, Descartes.
Bioethics.
Philosophical influences on art - romanticism, neo-platonism, other -isms etc.
Feminism - Plato, John Stuart Mill, Mary Wolstonecraft.
The Enlightenment - Voltaire, Rousseau, etc.
Our ordinary pretheoretical notion of what a person is.
Scientific paradigms.
Operationalism
Reductionism
Natural rights
Multiculturalism
The underdetermination of theory by evidence.
Empiricism.
Rationalism
Conceptual schemes

I could go on, but my fingers are getting tired.

	25-02-2003 07:49									#58
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by Agathon The latter is simply untrue, but the other poster pointed this out.

No, he didn't. Please explain to me why it's useful, nobody has done that yet, although a few have tried...

quote: You stupid idiot.

Is this the kind of stuff they teach you in philosophy? If so, I approve!

quote: The following were invented or discovered by philosophers or by people who were basically doing philosophy. ... I could go on, but my fingers are getting tired.

I can't believe you did that...

I mean, **** like "multiculturalism" as something invented/discovered by philosophy?

Give me a break! Who do you guys think you're fooling. You've just shown even more reasons why philosophy is a waste of funds at public universities.

This thread needs to be archived.

	25-02-2003 07:50									#59
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

And before you rant on about old stuff - philosophers are still formulating new political philosophies, having new thoughts about the nature of mind and responding to the ethical problems created by new technologies. It would take a long post to explain all the things that philosophy does, but I would urge you to look at the influence Ludwig Wittgenstein has had on diverse fields, such as mathematics, art, sociology, literary theory, history, etc.

Asher - yours is an unexamined life, lived in open defiance of reason. I'm not surprised you don't appreciate these things.

And let me add to my list.

The notion that society should not seek to better its members, but prevent conflict between them (Hobbes, Rousseau, Rawls, Dworkin, etc.).

	25-02-2003 07:53									#60
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

Oh my...

Hey, I'm a great philosopher.

I just discovered that when I shove my d1ck into a pencil sharpener, it hurts. I shall call it, the "Law of
Pen15".

Add that to your list.