Carrolade@lemmy.world 4 months ago
Yeah, pretty much. Philosophy people can be helpful though, their idea processing systems are fairly robust, and unlike a statistician or scientist, they sort of end up with a side-specialization in communication. Which is extremely valuable these days.
masterspace@lemmy.ca 4 months ago
The problem with philosophy in terms of understanding the bigger questions in life is that advanced physics has answered many questions that were previously in the realm of philosophy, and you can’t really understand what’s possible in reality / what constraints there are on abstract philosophy without understanding advanced physics.
Of course the problem with advanced physics is that it takes so much time and effort to learn and understand thoroughly that you often end up as a not great communicator to the average person.
aleph@lemm.ee 4 months ago
That’s true if you’re only talking about what was once called ‘natural philosophy’, but there are still many areas where philosophy and physics don’t really overlap - ethics, epistemology, aesthetics, language, existentialism, etc.
masterspace@lemmy.ca 4 months ago
I would argue that it absolutely applies to both existentialism and epistemology. Epistemologists frequently concern themselves with questions about the limits of human knowledge and understanding without actually going there themselves.
Carrolade@lemmy.world 4 months ago
I don’t think a philosophers job is to answer questions as much as formulate and ask them proficiently.
masterspace@lemmy.ca 4 months ago
Philosophers literally invented formal logic to help them answer questions. Yes they are trying to answer questions and constrain the possible answer space where they can’t.
Carrolade@lemmy.world 4 months ago
Certainly, but that was before the scientific method rose to prominence. Things change, and that can include the purpose of any given practice.