6 ms·

Personally, I do "formal philosophy" at least to some extent/in some papers, i.e., lots of logic, decision theory, a bit of applied mathematics. This kind of an

by 13415 6y ago

Personally, I do "formal philosophy" at least to some extent/in some papers, i.e., lots of logic, decision theory, a bit of applied mathematics. This kind of analytic philosophy superficially looks like science, at least to people who don't know much about the STEM fields. However, in my opinion it is clearly not science. IMHO, it's best to take philosophy as a discipline on its own. If I am pressed to decide between art and science, I'd call it an art, if not to annoy those people who erroneously believe that philosophy is a science. I personally find it hard to accept any discipline that does not follow the scientific method a science. Many other parts of the humanities in my opinion do not really qualify as science either. Or, perhaps they could be called "soft sciences" or "intellectual studies." However, philosophy is in the same boat as mathematics in this respect, which is also traditionally not considered a science but rather a discipline of its own, pursued for its own sake and with its own evaluation criteria. Few would call mathematics an art, though, or would they? I'm not sure.

routerl 6y ago
> Few would call mathematics an art, though, or would they? I'm not sure. Many would, precisely because it is not empirical, as indicated by the fact that mathematics departments are often in Arts faculties. As Sir Michael Atiyah put it: "The art in good mathematics, and mathematics is an art, is to identify and tackle problems that are both interesting and solvable." Mathematicians will often wax philosophical when speaking about mathematical beauty and elegance, which is widely considered to be a central pursuit of mathematics, second only to correctness. The problem here is that too many people are trying to use the word "science" to mean "the only thing that produces knowledge", in which case "mathematics is not a science, but does produce knowledge" is a heretical statement, even though a sizable portion of mathematicians would agree with it.
- GoblinSlayer 6y ago
  Isn't induction empirical?
  - routerl 6y ago
    "Mathematical induction" is a deductive proof technique with an unfortunately confusing name, but unrelated to the inductive reasoning of empirical science.

by 13415 6y ago

routerl 6y ago

> Few would call mathematics an art, though, or would they? I'm not sure. Many would, precisely because it is not empirical, as indicated by the fact that mathematics departments are often in Arts faculties. As Sir Michael Atiyah put it: "The art in good mathematics, and mathematics is an art, is to identify and tackle problems that are both interesting and solvable." Mathematicians will often wax philosophical when speaking about mathematical beauty and elegance, which is widely considered to be a central pursuit of mathematics, second only to correctness. The problem here is that too many people are trying to use the word "science" to mean "the only thing that produces knowledge", in which case "mathematics is not a science, but does produce knowledge" is a heretical statement, even though a sizable portion of mathematicians would agree with it.

GoblinSlayer 6y ago
Isn't induction empirical?
- routerl 6y ago
  "Mathematical induction" is a deductive proof technique with an unfortunately confusing name, but unrelated to the inductive reasoning of empirical science.