Xtratime Community

Xtratime Community (https://www.xtratime.org/forum/)
-   Xtratime Lounge (https://www.xtratime.org/forum/288-xtratime-lounge/)
-   -   Has Philosophy run its course? (https://www.xtratime.org/forum/288-xtratime-lounge/480890-has-philosophy-run-its-course.html)

pele10brazil March 26th, 2018 19:45

Has Philosophy run its course?
 
Was thinking about this for a while when trying to guess wich living philosophers will be "included in the HoF" of philosophy.(Chomsky maybe?) Wittgenstein thought that his book, Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus, is the last ever work on philosophy needing to be published and although he published latter works wich criticised ideas from the Tractatus, he was obviously on to something.

Most likely all major philosophical inquiries have been reflected and debated enough and the progress of philosophy(once slow because of dogmas) saw its most significant paradigm shift with the Age of Enlightenment. Now, fields like evolutionary biology and neuroscience shed light on questions such as the meaning of life, the nature of love or morality and it's here where we probably find the end(or future) of philosophy.
After DZG mentioned Sam Harris in another thread, I read a bit about him and he's currently researching the possibility of establishing a moral code by mapping the neural responses in various situations.(far-future discovery but still interesting)

So I think philosophy is no longer something that evolves in tandem with society, but needs to be replaced by special sciences, or we'll just end up pulling mental gymnastics to come up with something "new" and edgy.

JCamilo March 26th, 2018 20:43

Yes, someone who didnt study philosophy for years in a football forum is coming with the end of philosophy because there is a Hall of Fame. Ok.

pele10brazil March 26th, 2018 22:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by JCamilo (Post 22384482)
Yes, someone who didnt study philosophy for years in a football forum is coming with the end of philosophy because there is a Hall of Fame. Ok.

So that's why you never voice your opinions on football, team selections, tactical mistakes, players quality etc. Because you(and 99% of the forum) never were a pro football player or coached a football club and only interacted with the sport from an amateur perspective. Point taken :thumbsup:
Also I was under the impression that question threads are meant to educate someone via crowdsourcing with the great probability of more informed people giving their opinion.

P.S. "included in the HoF" Somehow you missed the scare quotes. I guess it happens.

Abedi March 26th, 2018 22:43

When a man spends his career mostly passing sideways, did he ever really play at all?

JCamilo March 26th, 2018 22:46

Yes, I am pretty sure that you can compare discussing the future of Philosophy to fan ramblings about football. Continue, Pele, you are obviously learning your lesson.

Remember the Witty boy? He had an odd idea that the problem of philosophy was not the answers, but the questions.

pele10brazil March 26th, 2018 23:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by JCamilo (Post 22384642)
Yes, I am pretty sure that you can compare discussing the future of Philosophy to fan ramblings about football. Continue, Pele, you are obviously learning your lesson.

Of course you can Joao, because I didn't publish a scientific paper now did I? Point is you have minimum credibility in your footballing opinions being a complete outsider to the pro football world.

Now let me give you a word of advice. Ease on the age-induced but hurt and try to offer your insight strictly on the subject(if you're interested at all in it, of course).

Reza March 26th, 2018 23:10

Even in the idiocracy age there is room for thought and yes it can be outside of the realm of 'science'. Meaning can be given to life even when science is discovering it's building blocks and mapping its progress.

Inácio March 26th, 2018 23:55

the day philosphy "dies" is the day we die as a thinking, species

Zico 10 March 27th, 2018 01:24

This is a pretty stupid question, even by XT standards.

TTM March 27th, 2018 02:47

As an engineer, I piss on Philosophy:stuckup:

JCamilo March 27th, 2018 04:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by pele10brazil (Post 22384690)
Of course you can Joao, because I didn't publish a scientific paper now did I? Point is you have minimum credibility in your footballing opinions being a complete outsider to the pro football world.

Now let me give you a word of advice. Ease on the age-induced but hurt and try to offer your insight strictly on the subject(if you're interested at all in it, of course).

No, You didnt wrote a scientific paper. You opened a stupid thread with an absurd question, wrote a bunch of even more stupid explanation dismissing several philosophers that published works after the 20's (when Tractatus was published, so before the Nazism, second war, mass media, cinema, post-modernism, nuclear age, in other words, several relevant changes that prompted a lot of philosophical work since they wouldn't just stop thinking Witttgenstein would finish it all), with or without quotes, and persists to compare with the fans of football writting in a football forum, as If anywhere I am defending the stupidy idea that anyone posting here has the credibility to teach Guardiola about footbal, which shows the same style that make you think Cristiano Ronaldo is such wonderful player proving you have no conditon to discuss the topic as I said.

I gave you an insight. You are refusing to listen. The question is dumb. I even mentioned Wittgenstein. But if you are planning to bring a poke and a philosopher battle between Derida and Russell, sure, go ahead. If not, just listen to Zico and give to this topic some productive silence.

pele10brazil March 27th, 2018 08:52

@JCamilo You might want to reflect a bit if the question is absurd because you don't like the person who asked, and if you subjected it to any sort of critical thinking. I'm guessing your prior analysis is full of confirmation bias, since somehow you tought I dismissed post-Wittgenstein philosophers, and still pick on the football analogy. Whether we debate about football, philosophy, science, politics, religion we won't establish the universal truth in a forum thread(but it's still a discussion). Texbook fallacy btw with that crap deductive reasoning: I don't like your analogy>so that's why you like CR>so you are wrong about unrelated topic.

In any case, I feel you and maybe others might have misunderstood the question. Let me clear things up and I think you'll agree we'll achieve a more productive discussion if I quote other peeps(not so pigheaded to put it gently) until you sort things for yourself out. I'm confident you can offer far more than "the question is stupid, YOU'RE STUPID"(proof being I actually got some reasoning after explaining some things to you).


Quote:

Originally Posted by Inácio (Post 22384778)
the day philosphy "dies" is the day we die as a thinking, species

This may be true depending on what angle you're approaching the matter. I wouldn't equate tought process with philosophy: "These shoes fit me pretty welll" , "It stinks in here; Joao must have farted".

People should always retain their critical thinking, and my question doesn't renders the philosophical works written up till now obsolete. But take a look at what Joao said "Nazism, second war, mass media, cinema, post-modernism, nuclear age, in other words, several relevant changes that prompted a lot of philosophical work". Changes are what made philosophy progress and exactly what I had in mind when I wrote the poll option "No, it will evolve synchronously with society".

I'll finish this quoting Reza.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reza (Post 22384698)
Even in the idiocracy age there is room for thought and yes it can be outside of the realm of 'science'. Meaning can be given to life even when science is discovering it's building blocks and mapping its progress.

Well this is precisely what I fear might be us "pulling mental gymnastics to come up with something "new" and edgy" but it's a good example(the point of the thread) :thumsup:

I'm gonna put it this way. Let's say "Truth" is a big picture covered by allot of puzzle pieces. In the process to gain knowledge we simply take out a piece of that puzzle to see more of the big picture, and sometimes we only think we have taken a piece.

Now after humans became rational beings, the're line of reasoning was dominated by superstition and dogma, afterwards philosophical thought in it's modern sense emerged and some new progress could be made(but superstitious tought still clinged to it heavily troughout centuries, impeding it's development).
So the question of the thread is if a new kind of progress is in the making and in need of detachment from it's predecessors, the scientific thought.

What will be new game changers? Ultra advanced AI, human genetic enhancement, extraterrestrial intelligence?
I guess I'm just under the suspicion that our quest to remove those piece from the big picture will suffer if philosophical thought clinges to scientific thought the same way superstitious thought did/does on both.

pele10brazil March 27th, 2018 09:14

Abedi's post is my favourite ITT :D And he phrased it perfectly because the question might sound too radical for people who don't want to "crush the World's corolla of wonders". Philosophical progress being immortal might be a "metaphorical truth" so to speak, in the same way some people argue religion is useful for social cohesion.

JCamilo March 27th, 2018 11:14

If you cannot tell the difference between saying your question is stupid and saying you are stupid (which I never did), how you can even produce anything coherent about philosophy? You mention Wittgenstein, but you cannot even get past him.

TTM March 27th, 2018 11:27

Let me pose this philosophical question.....If a philosopher falls in the woods, is he still unemployed?:hmm:

JCamilo March 27th, 2018 12:09

The question is also stupid. All philosophers are unemployed, no matter if you are Berkeley or Hume.

pele10brazil March 27th, 2018 12:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by JCamilo (Post 22385234)
If you cannot tell the difference between saying your question is stupid and saying you are stupid (which I never did), how you can even produce anything coherent about philosophy? You mention Wittgenstein, but you cannot even get past him.

Well I might think so when your opening post on the matter is this

Quote:

Originally Posted by JCamilo (Post 22384482)
Yes, someone who didnt study philosophy for years in a football forum is coming with the end of philosophy because there is a Hall of Fame. Ok.

So I'll let you objectively ponder if my suspicion is groundless or not.

It's true you made slight progress because I had patience and didn't simply respond with a snappy one-line personal attack. But your insight is pretty shallow so far and I think we can agree you resorted more to ad hominem rather than approaching the substance of the question w/o nitpicking or deconstructing the meaning behind certain phrases. Like I said, if the subject is appealing and you have something meaningful to add, by all means go ahead.

Regarding Wittgenstein, he grandiosely suggested the Tractus to be the last radical theory change in philosophy. What I meant by "he was obviously on to something" is that indeed philosophy might need a major change, wich implied by my OP is IMO its permanent assimilation in "scientific thought"(or how I grandly put it, die). So the point is pretty simple, not a critical analysis of the Tractatus(unless you do have something meanigful to quote it on the subject) or a dick meassuring contest on who knows more about Wittgenstein, but is philosophy in need of major change? If yes, is philosophy conceding its goals to science the right answer? Stick to that if you can and you're interested :thumbsup:

Morierinho March 27th, 2018 12:37

In before Sócrates.

szövkap March 27th, 2018 12:37

as long as we have great philosophy battles ŕ la Ero vs Orkan, I don't see it running its course yet :D

pele10brazil March 27th, 2018 12:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by szövkap (Post 22385466)
as long as we have great philosophy battles ŕ la Ero vs Orkan, I don't see it running its course yet :D

The greatest XT philosophical debate was Rugarici vs scores of shining knights on Albanian hustlers :D


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:59.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome