Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

SleepingAudi t1_itvjren wrote

I read the article FYI mods.

Again. I’m sorry to all the philosophy students, grad students and others out there trying to ‘make it’ using their degree. I’d remind them first of all that Schlick and co of the logical positivist fame lived at the poverty level for years and taught in classrooms without heat for atleast a few years due to the economic situation after the Paris peace treaty. Thats dedication to knowledge or perhaps, dare I say it, love of wisdom?

Anyway, I digress, but this idea that every one who graustes is going to be getting traction and making a living doing pop philosophy in blogs and on YouTube is just awful to me. This article is so bad and so amateur I can’t tolerate it. It doesn’t understand logical positivism, it doesn’t explain it correctly. and it certainly doesn’t offer a new insight into it. Thsi of course woudlnt make it past screening for a journal. Yet here it is confusing people who perhaps aren’t familiar with logical positivism and the Vienna circle.

‘Engage with the article’ I have and I won’t bother typing up any more about its specifics than I have to. It’s fundamentally flawed. It’s written to keep fresh content on a Blog and i suppose that’s all we can say. The author didn’t respect the topic enough to give it the time it deserves and the result is nonsense (allusion intended).

I’m not a logical positivist apologist but I just want to say this is so poor I can’t even tolerate not saying saying to warn the rest of you to steer clear of this mess.

34

mirh t1_itx2fmi wrote

This so much.

I get wanting to have different views, but this isn't even trying to be edgy. It's just absolute contrived bullshit for (from?) people trying to fuel the anti-scientific circlejerk.

It's not just wrong in the very typical sense of the field that of course everything is going to have more than one interpretation, it simply makes up words out of thin air. It's false, a fabrication, a lie.

It blows my mind that rationalism is somehow put in opposition to it, and that they couldn't even be arsed to follow the name of the movement till the '50s.

5

iiioiia t1_itxfknq wrote

>It's just absolute contrived bullshit for (from?) people trying to fuel the anti-scientific circlejerk.

A bit of a counterbalance to the pro-science circlejerk might be good for the memeplex we live in. Or, it may not...who knows, who cares.

−1

WildIsland-S-E t1_itxngxj wrote

I was picturing the wacky haired guy from Ancient Aliens. He's typing all furiously.

2

mirh t1_ityu1uz wrote

You seem to care in every thread with your riddles...

And STEMlord idiot balls aren't the whole there is about science.

1

iiioiia t1_itzaupe wrote

>You seem to care in every thread with your riddles...

It's good exercise for the mind!

>And STEMlord idiot balls aren't the whole there is about science.

The quality, self-confidence, and "ambitiousness" of the fan base annoys me, perhaps similar to how atheists are bothered by fundamentalist (or all) theists.

1

mirh t1_iu20g4q wrote

I get where you are coming from, but then you should be attacking self-righteousness, smug and indeed ironically kinda some touch of dogmatism (or if not any, they are there to boast not to actually dicuss).

Counterbalancing jerks by tangentially making another wrong in the opposite direction seems just to call for more vitriol.

1

iiioiia t1_iu228fa wrote

What if the actual problem lies where no one is looking: the Normies? 😮

Besides, if the science gang can't take a potshot now and then, maybe they don't have what it takes to hold the throne they somehow ended up sitting in.

0

mirh t1_iu2dt86 wrote

I'm not suggesting you to use gloves, but to aim to begin with.

This post has absolutely no positive purpose. It's not a potshot, taking a dent on the pride of pricks or something. It is simply FUD that will deceive a lot of naive people, and irritate everybody else with half a memory on the argument.

It blows my mind it's still up and upvoted.

1

iiioiia t1_iu2f991 wrote

> This post has absolutely no positive purpose.

No offense, but how would you even know such a thing? I bet I know....

> It is simply FUD that will deceive a lot of naive people, and irritate everybody else with half a memory on the argument.

Not everyone shares your beliefs. Fundamentalists of all kinds think their ideology of choice is The Best, history is filled with this sort of delusion....it is in our nature.

> It blows my mind it's still up and upvoted.

It's a philosophy forum - jump in and give it a try, you may even have fun!

1