The relationship between Science and Philosophy

[fromderinside]

Why is logic necessarily related to philosophy? Logic may be independent of either philosophy and science. Logical thought probably developed long before formal philosophical inquiry or scientific methods.

Yes. I'm sure humans were playing games and making decisions prior to Socrates et all. Hell, pre-humans figured out that it made sense to go out into the world and find a new life over 800,000 years ago. I'm sure the philosophy types will try to argue humans wouldn't have had speech without the philosophy of OG.

 

[surreptitious57]

It is may be more accurate to say that there are points within the spectrum of perceived reality which
cannot be accessed rather than there are physical worlds which are entirely separate from each other
Since the world we inhabit is conditional on the other one existing for if it did not then this one would
not neither. And if we inhabited the other world instead of this one then the laws of physics would be
significantly different. And that is but merely two points within the spectrum of perceived reality that
we know of. There could easily be more but they would not necessarily exist in the same time frame

I don't know what you're referring to when you say other world. Do you mean M theory? Our
world as a 3 dimensional brane that exists with many others? Or do you mean something else?

I mean the classical world and the quantum world. Obviously they both exist within the Universe but they are nonetheless
regarded as being separate from each other because the laws of physics governing them are not the same. Though I think
of all so called physical reality as being on a single spectrum regardless of any distinctions within it. And I say so called for
reality itself is not something that can be objectively determined. Science cannot since its sole remit is the investigation of
observable phenomena and so it has nothing to say on whether such phenomena constitute reality or not. It is therefore a
subject for philosophy but philosophical concepts however cannot be subject to falsification in the same way that scientific
hypotheses can. That is because philosophy investigates that which science cannot and so falsification is not possible. Now
scientists in general and physicists in particular may indeed reference the term reality but within such a context it is a non
scientific layman interpretation of the word so therefore does not mean the same thing from a strictly scientific perspective

 

[remez]

No philosophy, no logic. No logic, no science. There, was that so hard?

I concur.
Further isn't the scientific method a philosophical structure that governs science?

 

[surreptitious57]

Science is actually a branch of philosophy so any assumption that the two are non related is false
Though usually philosophy is regarded as only the parts of that discipline that are specifically non
scientific. Which are all the other branches which do not use empiricism as a means to determine
objective truth but use reason which though valid in and of itself cannot be subject to falsification

 

[DBT]

The scientific method of observation, gathering information, testing and analysis is not a branch of philosophy.

Observation is not a matter off philosophy.
Gathering information is not a matter of philosophy.
Testing: designing and carrying out experiments is not a matter of philosophy.
Analysis is not a matter of philosophy.

Science is a discipline in its own right. Moreover, the various scientific disciplines have become disciplines in their own right: neuroscience, physics, astronomy....

 

[surreptitious57]

Science is indeed a discipline in its own right and the various branches
of it are also disciplines in their own right as well but it is also a branch
of philosophy. And so the fact that science and philosophy are regarded
as being entirely separate from each other does not actually change that
as that is a misunderstanding of the relationship between the two since if
one references all branches of philosophy then that will also include science

 

[remez]

Science is a discipline in its own right.

I concur. Science is a first order discipline, whereas philosophy is a second order discipline. Sci… what is an ionic bond and how does it work? What is the structure of a silicate? Where will Saturn be on April Fool’s Day 2027? Phil…How do observational data confirm a theory? Is there such a thing as the scientific model and, if so, what is it? How do scientific theories explain things? How do you judge between competing theories?

Observation is not a matter off philosophy.
Gathering information is not a matter of philosophy.

One quick counter of the top of my head…the use of an instrument to observe or measure something illustrates that when a scientist claims to observe something, he is often interpreting data in the light of a large number of theoretical background assumptions about the event being observed and the instruments chosen to observe it.

Testing: designing and carrying out experiments is not a matter of philosophy.

How do positive test results from observation and experiment lend support to a scientific law or theory? What factors are involved in the claim that a scientific law or theory is rational? Ex… because gravity exists the universe can create itself out of nothing.

Analysis is not a matter of philosophy.

How so?

 

[DBT]

I concur. Science is a first order discipline, whereas philosophy is a second order discipline. Sci… what is an ionic bond and how does it work? What is the structure of a silicate? Where will Saturn be on April Fool’s Day 2027? Phil…How do observational data confirm a theory? Is there such a thing as the scientific model and, if so, what is it? How do scientific theories explain things? How do you judge between competing theories?

A theory is only as good as its explanatory power...how well it accounts for and explains the avaliable evidence. No philosophy required.

One quick counter of the top of my head…the use of an instrument to observe or measure something illustrates that when a scientist claims to observe something, he is often interpreting data in the light of a large number of theoretical background assumptions about the event being observed and the instruments chosen to observe it.

Theory is not a matter of 'philosophy' - it is a narrative that ties together a body of information: the available evidence gathered through observation. Instruments are designed and built to augment our senses, microscopes, telescopes, spectrometres, etc, the design and construction being largely determined by the nature of information being gathered.

How do positive test results from observation and experiment lend support to a scientific law or theory? What factors are involved in the claim that a scientific law or theory is rational? Ex… because gravity exists the universe can create itself out of nothing.

Test results are analyzed in relation to what is currently understood. Further testing, replication and peer review as an essential part of the scientific method is required to weed out errors and false interpretations.

How so?

Analysis is examining the relationship between two or more bodies of information in order to understand that relationship and build a clearer picture of 'how it works.' Computers are able to do that, only being limited by processing power and quality of information. The simplest of organisms that possess a central nervous system, a brain, are able to assess risk to benefit ratio when searching for food, shelter or a mate, yet are incapable of 'philosophy' in any sense of the word.

 

[Tom in Napa]

The simplest of organisms that possess a central nervous system, a brain, are able to assess risk to benefit ratio when searching for food, shelter or a mate, yet are incapable of 'philosophy' in any sense of the word.

By definition.

 

[DBT]

The simplest of organisms that possess a central nervous system, a brain, are able to assess risk to benefit ratio when searching for food, shelter or a mate, yet are incapable of 'philosophy' in any sense of the word.

By definition.

Can you expand on that a little?

 

[untermensche]

I concur. Science is a first order discipline, whereas philosophy is a second order discipline. Sci… what is an ionic bond and how does it work? What is the structure of a silicate? Where will Saturn be on April Fool’s Day 2027? Phil…How do observational data confirm a theory? Is there such a thing as the scientific model and, if so, what is it? How do scientific theories explain things? How do you judge between competing theories?

Some would say that science is just a subset of philosophy. A philosopher seeks truth. Science is a kind of truth.

But philosophy is much more than the truths of science. It is also an exploration of the world of ideas.

If one is a philosopher one should have an interest in science.

If one is a scientist your mind doesn't need to be that open. You need to focus on a small solvable problem, not ponder existence.

 

[Underseer]

Why is logic necessarily related to philosophy? Logic may be independent of either philosophy and science. Logical thought probably developed long before formal philosophical inquiry or scientific methods.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_logic

 

[DBT]

Why is logic necessarily related to philosophy? Logic may be independent of either philosophy and science. Logical thought probably developed long before formal philosophical inquiry or scientific methods.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_logic

Nothing that falsifies my remark on the matter, eg: ''the history of logic is the study of the development of the science of valid inference (logic)''

Valid inference, in basic terms, being an accurate representation of the relationship between bodies of information, or states.

 

[Togo]

Why is logic necessarily related to philosophy? Logic may be independent of either philosophy and science. Logical thought probably developed long before formal philosophical inquiry or scientific methods.

Because philosophy is the discipline in which logic is examined, refined, studied, and analysed, and the results recorded.

Why is testing necessarily related to science? It certainly pre-dates it.

 

[DBT]

Why is logic necessarily related to philosophy? Logic may be independent of either philosophy and science. Logical thought probably developed long before formal philosophical inquiry or scientific methods.

Because philosophy is the discipline in which logic is examined, refined, studied, and analysed, and the results recorded.

Why is testing necessarily related to science? It certainly pre-dates it.

Logic is independent of philosophy, just as testing is independent of science. Just as science does not require philosophy, but requires the principle of testing, just as philosophy requires logic and reason but may not employ testing.....to its detriment, as past examples of that absence demonstrate.

 

[Juma]

Because philosophy is the discipline in which logic is examined, refined, studied, and analysed, and the results recorded.

Why is testing necessarily related to science? It certainly pre-dates it.

Logic is independent of philosophy, just as testing is independent of science. Just as science does not require philosophy, but requires the principle of testing, just as philosophy requires logic and reason but may not employ testing.....to its detriment, as past examples of that absence demonstrate.

This is a totally ridiculous and useless discussion.

 

[Togo]

Because philosophy is the discipline in which logic is examined, refined, studied, and analysed, and the results recorded.

Why is testing necessarily related to science? It certainly pre-dates it.

Logic is independent of philosophy,

I guess we'll just agree to disagree.

 

[fromderinside]

What things come down to is amount of use within current discipline. Math has its own domain which includes logic as does philosophy and science the primary work is done within math. I assert math predates both philosophy and science in their uses in commerce and engineering by ancients. Philosophy may have its roots in religion and science may have arisen from the explaining of why and how maths worked in building.

 

[Kharakov]

People were using science before the scientific method was verbalized. People traded techniques of doing things, trained one another, etc.

Creating a spearhead preceded commerce and engineering, unless I've been taught a backwards history of the world.

 

[DBT]

Logic is independent of philosophy,

I guess we'll just agree to disagree.

Logic is an element of many fields of endevour, math, computers, science, etc, and not the exclusive domain of philosophy.

''Logic (from the Ancient Greek: λογική, logike)[1] is the use and study of valid reasoning.[2][3] The study of logic features most prominently in the subjects of philosophy, mathematics, and computer science.''