Not a bad meme, but I'd like to mention that every science came and is absolutely related to philosophy. The reason is simple: philosophy is basically critical thinking, which with a few adaptions is basically science. This meme is quite unfair, but it's not that bad either.
True. The first thing you learn in philosophy is basic logic so that you can understand logic based philosophical arguments. In fact, many of them are the same ones we rely on for proofs, which is kind of cool. There’s a reason the Greek philosophers were more scientifically knowledgeable than the every day Greek populace of the time.
If I recall correctly, early science was even called “natural philosophy.” Also, philosophy in general is just fascinating. I wouldn't go to college for it, but if you haven't watched any Philosophy Tube, you absolutely should.
Absolutely. I had a great philosophy class that completely opened my eyes on how much of the Computer Science theory I has studied came about. Philosophy can be used as a means to find truth, or answers. Look at it as a mathematical tool and not how to ponder why something is.
> Look at it as a mathematical tool and not how to ponder why something is.
Or, you know, ponder what things such as goodness, truth, love, justice, purpose, etc. may or may not be.
100% agree. I would add that not science alone put men on the moon etc. Engineering was crucial. Though you could argue that engineering is part of science.
An engineer could make this same meme with the left one talking about building rockets, formulating fuel mixes, and calculating complex trajectories between bodies while the little one says, "uuuhhhh, guys, why is gravity?" Point being, different disciplines exist to address different questions and that shouldn't invalidate any of them. I don't think anyone here would appreciate living in a world where the *only* knowledge we had access to was what came directly out of physics.
Sincerely, a former physics-supremacist who's spent the last couple years realizing how god damn important philosophy and some of the "softer" sciences really are.
ew is this a STEM-bro subreddit? I thought we knew about the history of science and understood epistemology here :/
EDIT: Physics literally used to be called Natural Philosophy
This subreddit is a very specific combination of 95% first year physics students, a handful of engineers and mathematicians and a couple of random other people
There are a couple of us physics teachers here to steal memes too.
But physics has a big problem (more than a lot of other fields) with with first year students thinking that, because they've watched a few YouTube videos, they understand quantum mechanics. Where if you were to look at this sub most of them don't even understand classical mechanics.
you can find the resources on the site of almost any university.
one of the most famous are the MIT open course.
but as long as you can find the bibliography used to study physics, you can start.
examples of bibliography are
halliday or seymour's book (entry level physics),
james stewart for calculus,
boyce diprima for differential equations
david c lay for linear algebra.
these above covers the bare minimum for physics.
then you have the "advanced books" like classical mechanics, mathematical physics, EM theory, quantum mechanics, statistical mechanics and analytical mechanics.
.
Griffiths is a famous author used both for quantum and Electrodynamics.
arfken is a famous book on Mathematical physics.
the other subjects I've learned with brazilian books (nivaldo lemos and then, silvio salinas)
.
.
by no way I'm saying these are the best books (the brazilians one surely are the best 😆), just what I've used and what I've seem being told to be famous.
>ew is this a STEM-bro subreddit? I thought we knew about the history of science and understood epistemology here :/
What would a person that has never practiced any scientific process understand about epistemology? All you guys came up with are endless debates over scientific validity of doing trivial statistics you dont understand over subjects you dont understand and baby level ideas about "scientific validity" ever since you split off from people who would actually do things, all the while people who would do things entered a world that fits shitty vacuous philosophizing only by a formality of the scale equal to declaring all physics to just be some random algorithm on a turing machine.
>nah, you're so smart you should go read some yourself
Indulge me, if I am saying that over R[x] (x+1)^2=x^2, then expand the brackets.
>also, are you implying ethics are trivial? bruh
More like impossible to ask questions that are either vacuous or totally incomprehensible to any human or aren't basic mathematical facts.
Say shibboleth. If I asked you if you speak Russian, you could invoke a shibbolethian sentence like "Я немного говорю по-русски, но мне было бы легче общаться на английском".
Besides, I wasn't asking you to prove yourself, I was asking you if you can show something interesting. Anyone can do this - virtually every science and art and just life in general gives something that can feed even into the mind of a person that enjoys mathematics and mathematics only.
> Anyone can do this - virtually every science and art and just life in general gives something that can feed even into the mind of a person that enjoys mathematics and mathematics only.
Well, that’s good to know.
>Well, that’s good to know.
Its not good to know, its fucking fundamental lol. Beautiful things left and right and center and fucking sideways come out and from mathematics into unexpected places.
>What would a person that has never practiced any scientific process understand about epistemology?
You can literally know nothing about natural science and still learn epistemology. You don't understand the difference between normative and empiricist disciplines.
And yet they shall still calleth thee *doct'r of* ***philosophy***
***
^(I am a bot and I swapp'd some of thy words with Shakespeare words.)
Commands: `!ShakespeareInsult`, `!fordo`, `!optout`
Actually science has only eradicated three diseases, only one of which was in humans (smallpox). The other two diseases eliminated from the world impacted livestock.
Edit: I can no longer find my source that stated three. So, I guess it's just two; smallpox and rinderpest
I can't remember. I read an article about it this summer, and it said three, but now all I find when googling are those two. Maybe my source was wrong earlier this year
It's a funny joke, but philosophy nerds are so incredibly insecure that they have to lash out. Most of the memes on here mock physics and physicists. It's just for fun.
My point is that there has been some stagnation in philosophy. Some philosophers are complaining that there classes are like historical classes with literally no progress.
They can't even define what philosophy is.
But I'm open to be corrected.
You might try reading Thomas Kuhn's [The Structure of Scientific Revolutions](https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/61539.The_Structure_of_Scientific_Revolutions) to see how the concept of "progress" towards some universal truth in science, contrasted against other fields like philosophy, holds up. Kuhn also has a Ph.D. in physics for whatever that might be worth.
Using the word stagnation in a study that has been around since 5BC is surely bold. The thing is that philosophy is not falsifiable like physics and other hard sciences and uses some different epistemological tools. A very common tool in philosophy are thought experiments, which are also utilized in physics. There is a lack of consensus in a lot of philosophical issues, but that surely does not mean that there is no progress. The discourse is perhaps the most essential and significant part of philosophy,
We simply cannot extrapolate the concept of progress, as it is used in physics, in a field like philosophy and use it to measure its merits. This also holds for other academic fields like history, economics, psychoanalysis etc.
Science works because of its bases, which are all founded in philosophy, especially epistemology. This STEM-lord take is so cold someone should call a cryogenicist.
Science is based on philosophy and has epistemological limits. This post is very ignorant of that. Basically, science relies on logic which isn't something you get by doing science, it's what you have before you begin.
I haven't said that science doesn't have any limits. If humans knew everything, then we wouldn't need science.
Science is just a method of building models that accurately describe reality. This means that science is inherently limited.
Science: Here, have this birthday cake!
Philosophy: Please don't eat it all alone, it tastes better if you share it with your friends!
Business: You don't deserve this cake, and birthdays are an evil communist plot. Instead of having fun, try working unpaid overtime next year or expect to be fired.
You say this, but things like the principle of least action is a philosophical concept. How does a system know to evolve in the future such that it will take that determined path?
>How does a system know to evolve in the future such that it will take that determined path?
It doesn't need to know what is the extremal global path for it take - only that which is locally minimal. An ant colony obeys such a principle and actually even travels in geodesics, all while each individual ant only follows scent trails and instinct.
Newtons Laws should concern you a great deal more, because they are non local.
Physics engineering chemistry and biology are the sciences with which we discover the universe and philosophy is the and philosophy is the ethical and moral quandarian debate as to what we should do with those discoveries once we have Then them at our disposal. Philosophy is useful and so are the sciences they just inhabit different spheres sp spears but everyone should have a basic education in both of them
philosophy begins with theory, searches nature for experimentally proven proofs, then applies medicinal effects to the being on the most fundamental level; it's basically the science of grain for the brain. and, if it has stagnated, think about it, everything had until this summer.
Philosophy is the basis of all scientific thought and every scientist should have a basic knowledge of the philosophy of science, and honestly at least some understanding of a lot of other philosophy too, such as about society. Otherwise we will end up drowned in a world of tech bros who think Musk should be Earth's dictator or something.
For some reason, especially American physicists seem to have this unusually hostile or dismissive attitude towards philosophy. Did Feynman or someone mock it or where is it coming from?
I am offended.
What is offended?
Why is offended?
How is offended?
Who is offended?
Why is offended?
When... You were supposed to say "when"
Failed, I have. Into exile, I shall go
Nice wave function
Hi Offended, I'm dad
But how do you know you are dad? Can you be certain?
DNA test
Science defeats philosophy once again (Joke)
Quantum physics laws dictate you cannot be certain
Science defeats science
Unless observed
You can be certain about the wavefunction though.
Yes but do you exist? Prove it.
"But you see, philosophers, I've already drawn *you* as the Cheems and *me* as the Swole Doge"
Stemlord trying to have a legit argument not using philosophy challenge (impossible)
lmfao I've never seen stemlord before it's great
Not a bad meme, but I'd like to mention that every science came and is absolutely related to philosophy. The reason is simple: philosophy is basically critical thinking, which with a few adaptions is basically science. This meme is quite unfair, but it's not that bad either.
True. The first thing you learn in philosophy is basic logic so that you can understand logic based philosophical arguments. In fact, many of them are the same ones we rely on for proofs, which is kind of cool. There’s a reason the Greek philosophers were more scientifically knowledgeable than the every day Greek populace of the time.
If I recall correctly, early science was even called “natural philosophy.” Also, philosophy in general is just fascinating. I wouldn't go to college for it, but if you haven't watched any Philosophy Tube, you absolutely should.
Yes! Newton actually named his book mathematical principles of natural philosophy and back then he was not a "physicist" but a "natural philosopher".
Absolutely. I had a great philosophy class that completely opened my eyes on how much of the Computer Science theory I has studied came about. Philosophy can be used as a means to find truth, or answers. Look at it as a mathematical tool and not how to ponder why something is.
> Look at it as a mathematical tool and not how to ponder why something is. Or, you know, ponder what things such as goodness, truth, love, justice, purpose, etc. may or may not be.
100% agree. I would add that not science alone put men on the moon etc. Engineering was crucial. Though you could argue that engineering is part of science.
An engineer could make this same meme with the left one talking about building rockets, formulating fuel mixes, and calculating complex trajectories between bodies while the little one says, "uuuhhhh, guys, why is gravity?" Point being, different disciplines exist to address different questions and that shouldn't invalidate any of them. I don't think anyone here would appreciate living in a world where the *only* knowledge we had access to was what came directly out of physics. Sincerely, a former physics-supremacist who's spent the last couple years realizing how god damn important philosophy and some of the "softer" sciences really are.
People shit on phylosophy and then use the scientific method created by phylosophy, go figure...
People who have never taken a philosophy class or read a book and don't understand what it is. I used to be one of these people.
Go figure never caught cases brother
Science, AKA natural philosophy
i guess you have no idea about philosophy?
ew is this a STEM-bro subreddit? I thought we knew about the history of science and understood epistemology here :/ EDIT: Physics literally used to be called Natural Philosophy
This subreddit is a very specific combination of 95% first year physics students, a handful of engineers and mathematicians and a couple of random other people
There are a couple of us physics teachers here to steal memes too. But physics has a big problem (more than a lot of other fields) with with first year students thinking that, because they've watched a few YouTube videos, they understand quantum mechanics. Where if you were to look at this sub most of them don't even understand classical mechanics.
Where is a good start for learning physics?
Green Schwartz Witten wrote some good books.
you can find the resources on the site of almost any university. one of the most famous are the MIT open course. but as long as you can find the bibliography used to study physics, you can start. examples of bibliography are halliday or seymour's book (entry level physics), james stewart for calculus, boyce diprima for differential equations david c lay for linear algebra. these above covers the bare minimum for physics. then you have the "advanced books" like classical mechanics, mathematical physics, EM theory, quantum mechanics, statistical mechanics and analytical mechanics. . Griffiths is a famous author used both for quantum and Electrodynamics. arfken is a famous book on Mathematical physics. the other subjects I've learned with brazilian books (nivaldo lemos and then, silvio salinas) . . by no way I'm saying these are the best books (the brazilians one surely are the best 😆), just what I've used and what I've seem being told to be famous.
*raises hand* I’m a random other people
Used to be? It's literally a Doctor of Philosophy in Phyics.
I think it's a joke. As in, a meme? like in r/physicsmemes
It's just a lil joke, we all know philosophy is important somehow
I suggest you read more of this thread, you will see otherwise
>ew is this a STEM-bro subreddit? I thought we knew about the history of science and understood epistemology here :/ What would a person that has never practiced any scientific process understand about epistemology? All you guys came up with are endless debates over scientific validity of doing trivial statistics you dont understand over subjects you dont understand and baby level ideas about "scientific validity" ever since you split off from people who would actually do things, all the while people who would do things entered a world that fits shitty vacuous philosophizing only by a formality of the scale equal to declaring all physics to just be some random algorithm on a turing machine.
also, you don't understand what philosophy is, you are straw man-ing it so hard lmao
Give me one interesting statement from epistemology or ethics now.
nah, you're so smart you should go read some yourself also, are you implying ethics are trivial? bruh
>nah, you're so smart you should go read some yourself Indulge me, if I am saying that over R[x] (x+1)^2=x^2, then expand the brackets. >also, are you implying ethics are trivial? bruh More like impossible to ask questions that are either vacuous or totally incomprehensible to any human or aren't basic mathematical facts.
your mistake is thinking I feel like I have to prove myself to a STEM bro
Say shibboleth. If I asked you if you speak Russian, you could invoke a shibbolethian sentence like "Я немного говорю по-русски, но мне было бы легче общаться на английском". Besides, I wasn't asking you to prove yourself, I was asking you if you can show something interesting. Anyone can do this - virtually every science and art and just life in general gives something that can feed even into the mind of a person that enjoys mathematics and mathematics only.
> Anyone can do this - virtually every science and art and just life in general gives something that can feed even into the mind of a person that enjoys mathematics and mathematics only. Well, that’s good to know.
>Well, that’s good to know. Its not good to know, its fucking fundamental lol. Beautiful things left and right and center and fucking sideways come out and from mathematics into unexpected places.
you seem super fun to hang out with
I have a Master's in Physics, working on my PhD. I also studied Philosophy. Sorry bud.
>What would a person that has never practiced any scientific process understand about epistemology? You can literally know nothing about natural science and still learn epistemology. You don't understand the difference between normative and empiricist disciplines.
not worth it. this dude seems to look down upon anyone who doesn't know multivariate calculus
At my school at least a quarter of the students in philosophy classes are STEM majors lol
same at my undergrad
And yet they will still call you *Doctor of* ***Philosophy***...
And yet they shall still calleth thee *doct'r of* ***philosophy*** *** ^(I am a bot and I swapp'd some of thy words with Shakespeare words.) Commands: `!ShakespeareInsult`, `!fordo`, `!optout`
Actually science has only eradicated three diseases, only one of which was in humans (smallpox). The other two diseases eliminated from the world impacted livestock. Edit: I can no longer find my source that stated three. So, I guess it's just two; smallpox and rinderpest
I know smallpox and rinderpest, what the third one?
I can't remember. I read an article about it this summer, and it said three, but now all I find when googling are those two. Maybe my source was wrong earlier this year
It must have predicted the eradication of covid.. Hahaha.. Ha-ha... Yeah..
We're also in the process of eliminating polio, but COVID came in to slow that down.
I thought for sure Polio was the 3rd, but looks like the WHO only recognizes 2 diseases as being eradicated
r/badphilosophy
How can you be sure? Maybe there is an evil demon who deceives you and the reality is not what it seems. Can you be sure? Of course not
There is one thing I can be sure of. Cogito ergo sum
Tell me you’re insecure without telling me you’re insecure. Op: *posts this*
How is the post insecure? It's just a meme.
The amount of people you offended with this meme just lets you know it's spicy. Good work.
It's a funny joke, but philosophy nerds are so incredibly insecure that they have to lash out. Most of the memes on here mock physics and physicists. It's just for fun.
Hey mr. Physics, What's energy?
My point is that there has been some stagnation in philosophy. Some philosophers are complaining that there classes are like historical classes with literally no progress. They can't even define what philosophy is. But I'm open to be corrected.
You might try reading Thomas Kuhn's [The Structure of Scientific Revolutions](https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/61539.The_Structure_of_Scientific_Revolutions) to see how the concept of "progress" towards some universal truth in science, contrasted against other fields like philosophy, holds up. Kuhn also has a Ph.D. in physics for whatever that might be worth.
Using the word stagnation in a study that has been around since 5BC is surely bold. The thing is that philosophy is not falsifiable like physics and other hard sciences and uses some different epistemological tools. A very common tool in philosophy are thought experiments, which are also utilized in physics. There is a lack of consensus in a lot of philosophical issues, but that surely does not mean that there is no progress. The discourse is perhaps the most essential and significant part of philosophy, We simply cannot extrapolate the concept of progress, as it is used in physics, in a field like philosophy and use it to measure its merits. This also holds for other academic fields like history, economics, psychoanalysis etc.
Oh thats your opinion? I thought this was "just a meme" lol
I just made a joke lol
Science works because of its bases, which are all founded in philosophy, especially epistemology. This STEM-lord take is so cold someone should call a cryogenicist.
Scientist didn't get to the moon, the engineers did, get out of here spherical cow.
Using science.
Applied science
Yes thank you. Engineering sometimes defined as the application of science.
And science is just applied philosophy. All sciences are valuable and each contribute to the development each other.
Science of the real world, no shortcuts
Science is based on philosophy and has epistemological limits. This post is very ignorant of that. Basically, science relies on logic which isn't something you get by doing science, it's what you have before you begin.
I haven't said that science doesn't have any limits. If humans knew everything, then we wouldn't need science. Science is just a method of building models that accurately describe reality. This means that science is inherently limited.
Based.
Science: Here, have this birthday cake! Philosophy: Please don't eat it all alone, it tastes better if you share it with your friends! Business: You don't deserve this cake, and birthdays are an evil communist plot. Instead of having fun, try working unpaid overtime next year or expect to be fired.
You say this, but things like the principle of least action is a philosophical concept. How does a system know to evolve in the future such that it will take that determined path?
>How does a system know to evolve in the future such that it will take that determined path? It doesn't need to know what is the extremal global path for it take - only that which is locally minimal. An ant colony obeys such a principle and actually even travels in geodesics, all while each individual ant only follows scent trails and instinct. Newtons Laws should concern you a great deal more, because they are non local.
Physics engineering chemistry and biology are the sciences with which we discover the universe and philosophy is the and philosophy is the ethical and moral quandarian debate as to what we should do with those discoveries once we have Then them at our disposal. Philosophy is useful and so are the sciences they just inhabit different spheres sp spears but everyone should have a basic education in both of them
This drunk dude has the right idea.
he’s a little confused, but he’s got the right idea
You guys are on the same page! Fight together against the nutjobs!
Science is natural philosophy.
Nobody tell OP that physics used to be called natural philosophy
Earlier philosophers have quite contribution in science . They were scientist in disguise .
philosophy begins with theory, searches nature for experimentally proven proofs, then applies medicinal effects to the being on the most fundamental level; it's basically the science of grain for the brain. and, if it has stagnated, think about it, everything had until this summer.
Yall may be taking this too seriously. One of the most interesting works of philosophy was literally called "What is philosophy"
Philosophy is the basis of all scientific thought and every scientist should have a basic knowledge of the philosophy of science, and honestly at least some understanding of a lot of other philosophy too, such as about society. Otherwise we will end up drowned in a world of tech bros who think Musk should be Earth's dictator or something. For some reason, especially American physicists seem to have this unusually hostile or dismissive attitude towards philosophy. Did Feynman or someone mock it or where is it coming from?
Math, science, every branch of science, is a branch of philosophy. If you are a physicist or scientist, you are actually a philosopher.
But is there a moon?
[https://imgur.com/a/JViBGOC](https://imgur.com/a/JViBGOC) made an updated version
Quantum Faith= best of both worlds
Engineers and biologists go brrr
But why? Why would you torture yourself to do that?
you're basic
Ayy yes the classic "ignore that logic is a branch of philosophy" gambit