2 ms·
If a philosophy is making positive statements it's an obvious sham - the best you can do with a meta logic is define the limits of what can be expressed within
by forgotpwtomain 10y ago
If a philosophy is making positive statements it's an obvious sham - the best you can do with a meta logic is define the limits of what can be expressed within a logic (postive and negative as related to this world) it cannot have anything to do with producing results.
- blueprint 10y agoPhilosophy is not correctly defined as the generation of logic. If the philosophy you learned is defined in connection with logic then it can be term deteriorated philosophy. The proof is that if we had learned philosophy correctly we also form our own eye of wisdom to see what is in the truth but no one can verify what is true through logic alone as you cannot verify your axioms without external referents. The reason is that truths can only be verified through problems. This all means we can't see the world through thinking, but through the problems.
- toufka 10y agoBut it can. Philosophy can clear the brush between two competing paths. If we take path A, that leads to X, Y, Z, whereas if we take path B, that leads to J, K, L. Philosophy has done nothing to say whether reality is more A-like, or more B-like, but in delineating and making clear the consequences of an A-like world vs a B-like world, it has done a significant service in producing physical results. When experimentalists show an inkling of a tiny sliver of 'K', we know can collapse with logical certainty around the B-like world. Trudging down those paths prior to experimental evidence is of very real value and is not disconnected from the physics itself.