3 ms·
If you read universally accepted classical philosophers most of their work are not precise at all, yet they are widely recognized. Actually, a lot of philosoph
by sametmax 9y ago
If you read universally accepted classical philosophers most of their work are not precise at all, yet they are widely recognized.
Actually, a lot of philosophy is "arguable". I don't think you can argue a lot with a mathematical proof.
And I'm sorry, but when Lacan compare the penis to square root of -1, it's hard to come back to scientists and sell the rigor of philosophy. Same when philosophers use and abuse Gödel's incompleteness theorems or the quantum observer effect to justify ludicrous claims.
- throwawayknecht 9y ago> Same when philosophers use and abuse Gödel's incompleteness theorems... Except the most popular abuser of Gödel's conclusions by far is a physicist and mathematician.
- sametmax 9y agoNobody said scientists couldn't be wrong. I'm just against the idea that philosophy is as rigorous as maths in most of the forms it has taken until today.