How philosophy is different from science and math

Which is, itself heavily underlaid by logic. The inferences around rejecting or failing to reject the null hypothesis is the core of inferential statistics but it follows very strict rules of logic.



Thankfully the formal logic is still implicit in the underlying techniques.

Formal logic entails far more than the scientific inductive method.

That's why formal logic and theories of knowledge are taught at universities in advanced undergraduate courses.

It's an open question if induction results in universal certain knowledge, or if it just results in interpretation

As a scientist myself, I agree with Albert Einstein that scientific education should be required to include formal logic and philosopy of science, which Einstein credited with making him a better scientist.
 
Formal logic entails far more than the scientific inductive method.

That's why formal logic and theories of knowledge are taught at universities in advanced undergraduate courses.

It's an open question if induction results in universal certain knowledge, or if it just results in interpretation

As a scientist myself, I agree with Albert Einstein that scientific education should be required to include formal logic and philosopy of science, which Einstein credited with making him a better scientist.

What is your area of science? That's really cool!
 
What is your area of science? That's really cool!

Geology and geophysics.

I spent 8 years training for a scientific career, and there was never any actual classwork or training in formal logic, which I believe would make a better scientist, and allow scientists to have a better grasp on the explanatory power of their theories, and on understanding what counts as a good explanation.
 
Geology and geophysics.

Wow! That sounds really cool.

I spent 8 years training for a scientific career, and there was never any actual classwork or training in formal logic, which I believe would make a better scientist, and allow scientists to have a better grasp on the explanatory power of their theories, and on understanding what counts as a good explanation.

Regardless of the training or lack thereof it is still integral to the science. I agree with you 100% that it should be taught more.
 
I am tired of your stupidity. You took two intro classes and you think you're an expert on all aspects of philosophy.

I never said I was an expert in anything! Why misrepresent my position just so you can insult me?

Philosophy uses logic. This is some big insight you have?!

Let's revisit the quote I provided earlier from the PHILOSOPHY TEXT BOOK: "Logic, therefore, is essential to the practice of philosophy."
 
I never said I was an expert in anything! Why misrepresent my position just so you can insult me?



Let's revisit the quote I provided earlier from the PHILOSOPHY TEXT BOOK: "Logic, therefore, is essential to the practice of philosophy."

And grammar is essential to the practice of novel writing. So what.
 
And grammar is essential to the practice of novel writing. So what.

I see you are not interested in a serious discussion but you are clearly playing some "troll game" here. Your behavior is starting to grow boring. I will, unfortunately, have to leave you to it as you don't seem interested in the discussion, you just want to insult people.

Thanks.
 
I see you are not interested in a serious discussion but you are clearly playing some "troll game" here. Your behavior is starting to grow boring. I will, unfortunately, have to leave you to it as you don't seem interested in the discussion, you just want to insult people.

Thanks.

Bye.
 
Back
Top