Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

TAMiiNATOR t1_j3xdp2i wrote

Reply to comment by Universeintheflesh in Philosophy has never been the detached pursuit of truth. It’s always been deeply invested in its own cultural perspective. by IAI_Admin

Can you recommend good readings from that class?

17

Experiunce t1_j40czde wrote

Here are some examples on Philosophy of Science tangentially related to biases and world view:

  1. Richard Rudner argues that it is impossible to separate science from human/personal biases because scientists are human. Their biases impact their entire point of view. https://www.jstor.org/stable/185617
  2. Thomas Kuhn talks about how science evolves and how the things that we, as a society, consider facts change and evolve. Famous phrase: Paradigm Shift. https://www.lri.fr/~mbl/Stanford/CS477/papers/Kuhn-SSR-2ndEd.pdf
  3. Paul Feyerabend speaks on Scientism, which is "the belief that science has the answer to all meaningful questions" (source). I can't find a PDF online but the book is, "The Tyranny of Science".I want to add that despite the connotation that philosophy is fighting against science when discussing scientism, it only focuses on the OVER-reliance of science. Not simply just the use of science as being bad.

There are excellent philosophy of science intro books that are relatively short and jump around to introduce cool ideas and explain how science has evolved.

Here is one: Philosophy of Science: A Very Short Introduction by Samir Okashhttps://philpapers.org/rec/OKAPOS

Science used to be called 'Natural Philosophy'. It was born from Philosophy. It is very thorough in its processes, similar to science, but mainly deals with conceptual/abstract issues. I would argue that Philosophy is a vital part of any academic category as it helps expand perspective and still maintains a high bar of accuracy to be taken seriously.

12

Suntzie t1_j42p0lb wrote

Another great one is Bruno Laytour: We Have Never Been Modern, argues that the concept of what it means to modern has always been contingent on the time. And that scientific objects are insperable from human nature

4

Universeintheflesh t1_j3yw3h1 wrote

I’m sorry, it was many years ago that I took it and I don’t have the material anymore. Now that I am thinking about it again though I am kind of interested in pursuing that information again. One thing I do remember is that it was taught by someone who was a minor celebrity (might be the wrong term for semi famous in the field) named Peter Boghossian. Looking up about him now I see that he kinda got forced out of the university a couple years ago by being too controversial. I am currently reading through his interview about it: https://dartreview.com/an-interview-with-peter-boghossian/

6

monsantobreath t1_j3z6725 wrote

I got as far as him saying antifa was destroying Portland to remember that just because you're a philosopher doesn't mean you know Jack shit about politics or in this case the facts of what actually happened.

He's the guy who taught how to overcome one's biases?

12

Experiunce t1_j40d82r wrote

Yea one of the most famous sad boi philosophers was famously a piece of shit irl. There's a story about him pushing a lady down a flight of stairs.

Our boy Arthur Schopenhauer

3

Mustelafan t1_j428haa wrote

Maybe he's right and you're actually the one that's biased? No, no, that couldn't be it 🤔

1

monsantobreath t1_j42bw8m wrote

Given the facts around what happened in Portland he's the biased one.

1