|
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
---------------------------------
|
|
William asked:
|
|
Is it worthwhile studying philosophy, since all that philosophers talk about will one day be adequately
handled by the particular sciences? It seems, then, that philosophy is just a vast illusion, dealing not
with reality but with mere concepts.
|
|
============
|
|
There is a large and highly questionable assumption underlying this question: that everything can be
reduced to science. This view is called "scientism". I think the assumption is wrong. I would
recommend finding the magazine Philosophy Nowissue 27 (June/ July 2000) and reading the debate
on this topic. You could also look for New Scientistnos. 1832 and 1833 (1 and 8 August 1992) for two
articles by Mary Midgley and Peter Atkin on this topic.
|
|
And who says concepts are not reality? They are part of my reality!
|
|
Tim Sprod
|
|
One good reason for studying philosophy is to get some training in critical thinking. I say that because
one aspect of learning critical thinking is learning to recognize fallacies like the fallacy of begging the
question. You beg the question in an argument when you assume something that needs at least as
much proof as your conclusion. I think you have begged the question when you assume that all that
philosophers talk about will one day be adequately handled the particular sciences. Should we simply
assume that is true, or have you some argument for that premise? For example, how is whether
capital punishment is right do be decided by science? Or how is whether there is a God to be decided
by science? Just to cite two philosophical questions.
|
|
Another thing you might learn from critical thinking is to clarify what you say so that you can
determine whether what you say is true. You cannot determine whether what you say is true unless
you understand it. You write that philosophy is not about reality, but about "mere" concepts. Even if
you are right about that, and it is not clear you are, how "mere" are concepts. It is our concepts that
slice up the world so that we can understand and investigate the world. These concepts are our tools
for thinking about reality. And, like any tools, we would like them sharp and clean. Otherwise our
thinking about reality will be confused. It is one of the most important jobs of philosophy to clarify and
sharpen these concepts. So, one thing you might learn by studying philosophy is that concepts are
not "mere." And another thing to learn is how to employ these concepts to answer questions not in
the province of science.
|
|
Kenneth Stern
|
|