4 ms·
Philosophy improves critical thinking and reasoning skills but it requires active engagement in philosophical literature and inquiry. I can tell by your underst
by birdtime 9y ago
Philosophy improves critical thinking and reasoning skills but it requires active engagement in philosophical literature and inquiry. I can tell by your understanding of philosophy as "feeling" based that you haven't done this -- and you're missing out on a valuable form of rational inquiry. No it's not scientific. But to sit back, arms-crossed ready to rebuke anything philosophical because it fails to satisfy the criterion of a different discipline is so contrary to a healthy, open-minded, rational way of living.
- 0xdeadbeefbabe 9y agoDo you concede philosophers never back up their statements with empirical evidence?
- birdtime 9y agoPhilosophy is not an empirical science.
- wsy 9y agoThis is an example how philosophers work: if I understood you correctly, you state that one must have empirical evidence to back up their position. If someone claims something without giving empirical evidence, their claim should be refuted (or at least ignored). However, your claim that empirical evidence is required to make a position valid, is itself not backed up by any empirical evidence. I can even give counter-evidence, e.g., mathematics works very well without empirical evidence, so it doesn't seem to be required to gain valid knowledge. (just to back up my philosophical argument with empirical evidence)
- 0xdeadbeefbabe 9y agoHaha touché. Though the argument hurts my stomach somewhat.
- stdbrouw 9y agoI guess I'll have to throw away my MA in Philosophy then. If you read closely, you'll see that I didn't criticize philosophy, only the tendency of philosophers to make empirical statements about the practical value of their discipline without the empirical proof to back it up.