3 ms·

> But that's not what you asked, and it's not what I claimed. I didn't say that philosophy is entirely devoid of value, only that a lot of it is. You claimed y

by abeppu 3y ago

> But that's not what you asked, and it's not what I claimed. I didn't say that philosophy is entirely devoid of value, only that a lot of it is. You claimed you can empirically observe "that the most effective method for expanding human knowledge is science", which I think requires you to observe the efficacy of all methods of expanding human knowledge. Regarding ethics, empirically gathering what people's ethical opinions are is surveying. This is distinct from knowledge about ethical systems. For example, preference utilitarianism sets the stage for social choice theory, in which theorems tell us about the properties and weaknesses of systems for groups of agents to collectively make choices (Arrow's theorem, Harsanyi's theorem etc). > Really? How do you know what the word "integer" means without making any observations of the world? I know the English word "integer" through interaction with the world; this does not mean that true properties of addition are "empirical" truths proceeding from science.

lisper 3y ago
> requires you to observe the efficacy of all methods of expanding human knowledge I should have hedged with "all known methods". It's possible that someone might invent a more effective method (but I believe there is actually good reason to believe that this is not possible, but that's a tangent). > preference utilitarianism sets the stage for social choice theory, in which theorems tell us about the properties and weaknesses of systems for groups of agents to collectively make choices (Arrow's theorem, Harsanyi's theorem etc). Sure. So? Arrow's theorem is a great example. It's a theorem. It's math. It's not what is generally done under the rubric of "philosophy". > this does not mean that true properties of addition are "empirical" truths proceeding from science Yes it does. What is the "true" value of (say) 11 + 27? It could be 38, but it could also be 1 (mod 12) or 13 (mod 24) any of which might be the "true" value depending on the application.

by abeppu 3y ago

lisper 3y ago

> requires you to observe the efficacy of all methods of expanding human knowledge I should have hedged with "all known methods". It's possible that someone might invent a more effective method (but I believe there is actually good reason to believe that this is not possible, but that's a tangent). > preference utilitarianism sets the stage for social choice theory, in which theorems tell us about the properties and weaknesses of systems for groups of agents to collectively make choices (Arrow's theorem, Harsanyi's theorem etc). Sure. So? Arrow's theorem is a great example. It's a theorem. It's math. It's not what is generally done under the rubric of "philosophy". > this does not mean that true properties of addition are "empirical" truths proceeding from science Yes it does. What is the "true" value of (say) 11 + 27? It could be 38, but it could also be 1 (mod 12) or 13 (mod 24) any of which might be the "true" value depending on the application.