Conversation

Notices

1. Johnny Null (johnnynull@freezepeach.xyz)'s status on Monday, 26-Jun-2017 16:25:15 UTC Johnny Null
   Watched hour long talk from a philosopher: what is art?
   Result?
   Stuff.
   Super useful.
   • reality karen teaduck III (reality@quitter.se)'s status on Monday, 26-Jun-2017 16:27:49 UTC reality karen teaduck III

     in reply to
     @johnnynull try reading 'free thought and official propaganda' for some useful philosophy
   • Johnny Null (johnnynull@freezepeach.xyz)'s status on Monday, 26-Jun-2017 16:29:17 UTC Johnny Null

     in reply to

     • reality karen teaduck III
     @reality I'll look for it.
   • Johnny Null (johnnynull@freezepeach.xyz)'s status on Monday, 26-Jun-2017 16:34:32 UTC Johnny Null

     in reply to

     • reality karen teaduck III
     @reality Cited on Infowars. lel
   • reality karen teaduck III (reality@quitter.se)'s status on Monday, 26-Jun-2017 16:34:55 UTC reality karen teaduck III

     in reply to
     @johnnynull haha, hey, anyone can cite anything!
     Johnny Null likes this.
   • Johnny Null (johnnynull@freezepeach.xyz)'s status on Monday, 26-Jun-2017 16:38:12 UTC Johnny Null

     in reply to

     • reality karen teaduck III
     @reality I think you're confused. I'm (mildly) familiar with Politics by Aristotle (who would argue against this tome.)
   • Johnny Null (johnnynull@freezepeach.xyz)'s status on Monday, 26-Jun-2017 16:38:54 UTC Johnny Null

     in reply to

     • reality karen teaduck III
     @reality I think you believe I've never… experienced philosophers' works.
   • reality karen teaduck III (reality@quitter.se)'s status on Monday, 26-Jun-2017 16:41:23 UTC reality karen teaduck III

     in reply to
     @johnnynull wasn't making that assumption, just giving an example of a text i think is practically useful
   • reality karen teaduck III (reality@quitter.se)'s status on Monday, 26-Jun-2017 16:43:24 UTC reality karen teaduck III

     in reply to
     @johnnynull of course i don't think all problems in phil are worthwhile, but i believe it can, has and does produce worthwhile results
   • reality karen teaduck III (reality@quitter.se)'s status on Monday, 26-Jun-2017 16:45:56 UTC reality karen teaduck III

     in reply to
     @johnnynull if you agree that it has developed logic, argumentation, science, maths, on what basis do you think it can no longer do this?
   • Johnny Null (johnnynull@freezepeach.xyz)'s status on Monday, 26-Jun-2017 16:52:56 UTC Johnny Null

     in reply to

     • reality karen teaduck III
     @reality That's not what I'm arguing. I'm say its work is done. It is a (now) useless relic.
   • Johnny Null (johnnynull@freezepeach.xyz)'s status on Monday, 26-Jun-2017 16:54:10 UTC Johnny Null

     in reply to

     • reality karen teaduck III
     @reality Been said religion helped literacy spread. Good result there. Doesn't make religion itself useful.
   • Johnny Null (johnnynull@freezepeach.xyz)'s status on Monday, 26-Jun-2017 22:26:53 UTC Johnny Null

     • Ruben
     @tregeagle I didn't notice.
   • Johnny Null (johnnynull@freezepeach.xyz)'s status on Tuesday, 27-Jun-2017 09:32:45 UTC Johnny Null

     • reality karen teaduck III
     • Jonne Arjoranta
     @jaranta "requires… philosophical"
     Oh, I've no doubt the circle-jerk of philosophers feel they're still super important @reality
   • Johnny Null (johnnynull@freezepeach.xyz)'s status on Tuesday, 27-Jun-2017 09:34:11 UTC Johnny Null

     • reality karen teaduck III
     • Jonne Arjoranta
     @jaranta Ethics? Like "when does life begin?" Philosophy has gotten us nowhere with this. / @reality
   • Johnny Null (johnnynull@freezepeach.xyz)'s status on Tuesday, 27-Jun-2017 09:35:04 UTC Johnny Null

     • reality karen teaduck III
     • Jonne Arjoranta
     @jaranta Because a true answer requires objective facts. Data. Science. / @reality
   • Johnny Null (johnnynull@freezepeach.xyz)'s status on Tuesday, 27-Jun-2017 09:36:37 UTC Johnny Null

     • Jonne Arjoranta
     @jaranta Philosopher circle-jerk. Give me a concrete example. This airy-fairy language doesn't impress.
   • Johnny Null (johnnynull@freezepeach.xyz)'s status on Tuesday, 27-Jun-2017 09:45:13 UTC Johnny Null

     • Jonne Arjoranta
     @jaranta 1) I asked for an example.
     2) I'm using the same language I have throughout the thread.
     You are a delicate, sad child.
   • Johnny Null (johnnynull@freezepeach.xyz)'s status on Tuesday, 27-Jun-2017 09:45:45 UTC Johnny Null

     • Jonne Arjoranta
     @jaranta Philosophy served you well! #keks
   • Johnny Null (johnnynull@freezepeach.xyz)'s status on Tuesday, 27-Jun-2017 09:50:05 UTC Johnny Null

     • Jonne Arjoranta
     @jaranta Yes.
   • reality karen teaduck III (reality@quitter.se)'s status on Tuesday, 27-Jun-2017 12:40:47 UTC reality karen teaduck III

     in reply to
     @johnnynull wrong, an answer requires data and then reasoning on these data
   • reality karen teaduck III (reality@quitter.se)'s status on Tuesday, 27-Jun-2017 12:41:55 UTC reality karen teaduck III

     in reply to
     @johnnynull another e.g. science can test if relationship causal, but philosophy defines/studies what it means to be a causal relation
   • Johnny Null (johnnynull@freezepeach.xyz)'s status on Tuesday, 27-Jun-2017 13:03:49 UTC Johnny Null

     in reply to

     • reality karen teaduck III
     @reality Number of times I've heard a researcher/scientist say "we now are handing this off to the philosophy department":
     Zero.
   • Johnny Null (johnnynull@freezepeach.xyz)'s status on Tuesday, 27-Jun-2017 13:07:21 UTC Johnny Null

     in reply to
     BTW, this also applies to your oft-cited "species categorization".
   • reality karen teaduck III (reality@quitter.se)'s status on Tuesday, 27-Jun-2017 13:08:37 UTC reality karen teaduck III

     in reply to
     @johnnynull irrelevant
   • Johnny Null (johnnynull@freezepeach.xyz)'s status on Tuesday, 27-Jun-2017 13:11:06 UTC Johnny Null

     in reply to

     • reality karen teaduck III
     @reality Very handy. You insist philosophy relevant but offer no concrete examples. Then decide what is relevant when pushed back
   • reality karen teaduck III (reality@quitter.se)'s status on Tuesday, 27-Jun-2017 13:12:05 UTC reality karen teaduck III

     in reply to
     @johnnynull no1 says "we are now handing this to the number theory dept" after doing a sum, but this work still informs the work, results
   • reality karen teaduck III (reality@quitter.se)'s status on Tuesday, 27-Jun-2017 13:15:55 UTC reality karen teaduck III

     in reply to
     @johnnynull i've given you no end of examples, you're just unwilling to accept any, for unclear reasons
   • Johnny Null (johnnynull@freezepeach.xyz)'s status on Tuesday, 27-Jun-2017 13:18:12 UTC Johnny Null

     in reply to

     • reality karen teaduck III
     @reality Yes, because we have math and science. Statistics. We don't hand it to alchemists either.
   • Johnny Null (johnnynull@freezepeach.xyz)'s status on Tuesday, 27-Jun-2017 13:19:03 UTC Johnny Null

     in reply to

     • reality karen teaduck III
     @reality You've made assertions.
   • reality karen teaduck III (reality@quitter.se)'s status on Tuesday, 27-Jun-2017 13:20:32 UTC reality karen teaduck III

     • andyc@pleroma.stream
     @andyc @johnnynull what is fucking maths?
   • Johnny Null (johnnynull@freezepeach.xyz)'s status on Tuesday, 27-Jun-2017 13:21:17 UTC Johnny Null

     in reply to

     • reality karen teaduck III
     @reality Assertion: science does shit. Concrete: this probe was built. Does $THING.
   • Johnny Null (johnnynull@freezepeach.xyz)'s status on Tuesday, 27-Jun-2017 13:22:00 UTC Johnny Null

     • reality karen teaduck III
     • andyc@pleroma.stream
     @andyc Pffft. You don't even know what football is. / @reality
   • reality karen teaduck III (reality@quitter.se)'s status on Tuesday, 27-Jun-2017 13:22:20 UTC reality karen teaduck III

     in reply to
     @johnnynull sounds like engineering to me. therefore, science is useless. this is the standard you're applying to philosophy
   • Johnny Null (johnnynull@freezepeach.xyz)'s status on Tuesday, 27-Jun-2017 13:23:16 UTC Johnny Null

     in reply to

     • reality karen teaduck III
     • andyc@pleroma.stream
     @reality He's referring to math v maths. American v British. / @andyc
   • Johnny Null (johnnynull@freezepeach.xyz)'s status on Tuesday, 27-Jun-2017 13:25:37 UTC Johnny Null

     in reply to
     I don't recall a string being highlighted / linked before. Is this a new behavior in Twidere or GnuSocial?
   • Johnny Null (johnnynull@freezepeach.xyz)'s status on Tuesday, 27-Jun-2017 13:27:10 UTC Johnny Null

     • reality karen teaduck III
     • andyc@pleroma.stream
     @andyc I think because it is a single category. Much like saying "crowd are" sounds ludicrous. / @reality
   • Johnny Null (johnnynull@freezepeach.xyz)'s status on Tuesday, 27-Jun-2017 13:28:27 UTC Johnny Null

     • reality karen teaduck III
     • andyc@pleroma.stream
     @andyc A possibility. Though I would think that more likely in regards to quitter.se. / @reality
   • reality karen teaduck III (reality@quitter.se)'s status on Tuesday, 27-Jun-2017 13:33:01 UTC reality karen teaduck III

     • andyc@pleroma.stream
     @andyc @johnnynull doesn't seem like wise Economic given the bloody price they're paying for the degrees
   • Johnny Null (johnnynull@freezepeach.xyz)'s status on Tuesday, 27-Jun-2017 13:33:41 UTC Johnny Null

     in reply to

     • reality karen teaduck III
     @reality Nope. Science and engineering produce things. They may become relics in the far future, but they are useful now.
   • Johnny Null (johnnynull@freezepeach.xyz)'s status on Tuesday, 27-Jun-2017 13:34:36 UTC Johnny Null

     in reply to

     • reality karen teaduck III
     @reality Unclear is when I cite people who are actually doing things, without requiring philosophy, you deem it irrelevant.
   • reality karen teaduck III (reality@quitter.se)'s status on Tuesday, 27-Jun-2017 13:35:45 UTC reality karen teaduck III

     in reply to
     @johnnynull science doesn't produce any material, it produces results and knowledge, used by other disciplines like engineering
   • reality karen teaduck III (reality@quitter.se)'s status on Tuesday, 27-Jun-2017 13:36:30 UTC reality karen teaduck III

     in reply to
     @johnnynull thus, though it does not produce your beloved material things directly, it is useful 4 their production
   • Johnny Null (johnnynull@freezepeach.xyz)'s status on Tuesday, 27-Jun-2017 13:36:42 UTC Johnny Null

     • andyc@pleroma.stream
     @andyc No. There's more than one kind of economy (see fish/fishes or people/peoples)@reality
   • reality karen teaduck III (reality@quitter.se)'s status on Tuesday, 27-Jun-2017 13:37:12 UTC reality karen teaduck III

     in reply to
     @johnnynull same for philosophy, though often it is more of a transitive relation, since results more often influence science, maths, etc
   • Johnny Null (johnnynull@freezepeach.xyz)'s status on Tuesday, 27-Jun-2017 13:37:38 UTC Johnny Null

     in reply to

     • reality karen teaduck III
     @reality I consider discoveries important. I didn't boil it down to material things.
   • Johnny Null (johnnynull@freezepeach.xyz)'s status on Tuesday, 27-Jun-2017 13:38:35 UTC Johnny Null

     in reply to

     • reality karen teaduck III
     @reality Yes. Useful. Philosophy no longer produces. No longer useful. Do you never retire anything?
   • reality karen teaduck III (reality@quitter.se)'s status on Tuesday, 27-Jun-2017 13:39:19 UTC reality karen teaduck III

     in reply to
     @johnnynull again: philosophy discovered maths, science, continues to discover results relevant to them
   • reality karen teaduck III (reality@quitter.se)'s status on Tuesday, 27-Jun-2017 13:39:29 UTC reality karen teaduck III

     in reply to
     @johnnynull this task https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_science is clearly not equal to science itself
   • Johnny Null (johnnynull@freezepeach.xyz)'s status on Tuesday, 27-Jun-2017 13:41:37 UTC Johnny Null

     in reply to

     • reality karen teaduck III
     @reality (the continues to bit)
   • Johnny Null (johnnynull@freezepeach.xyz)'s status on Tuesday, 27-Jun-2017 13:42:05 UTC Johnny Null

     in reply to

     • reality karen teaduck III
     @reality For the zillionth time, that's an assertion. Back it up.
   • reality karen teaduck III (reality@quitter.se)'s status on Tuesday, 27-Jun-2017 13:46:51 UTC reality karen teaduck III

     in reply to
     @johnnynull paraconsistent logic, ontology developed by philosophy, useful in computer science/software engineering,
   • reality karen teaduck III (reality@quitter.se)'s status on Tuesday, 27-Jun-2017 13:47:36 UTC reality karen teaduck III

     in reply to
     @johnnynull produces results in biology, etc
   • reality karen teaduck III (reality@quitter.se)'s status on Tuesday, 27-Jun-2017 13:48:14 UTC reality karen teaduck III

     in reply to
     @johnnynull mentioned this one several times before, you seemed unwilling to understand
   • Johnny Null (johnnynull@freezepeach.xyz)'s status on Tuesday, 27-Jun-2017 13:49:14 UTC Johnny Null

     in reply to

     • reality karen teaduck III
     @reality You are literally repeating the same thing.
   • Johnny Null (johnnynull@freezepeach.xyz)'s status on Tuesday, 27-Jun-2017 13:49:45 UTC Johnny Null

     in reply to

     • reality karen teaduck III
     @reality Nope.
   • reality karen teaduck III (reality@quitter.se)'s status on Tuesday, 27-Jun-2017 13:51:31 UTC reality karen teaduck III

     in reply to
     @johnnynull i mean i can't give you a tour of entire scientific fields in 140c, read a damn book
   • Johnny Null (johnnynull@freezepeach.xyz)'s status on Tuesday, 27-Jun-2017 13:52:30 UTC Johnny Null

     in reply to

     • reality karen teaduck III
     @reality Rather than repeating yourself, digging your heels in, try to actually listen to what I'm saying.
   • Johnny Null (johnnynull@freezepeach.xyz)'s status on Tuesday, 27-Jun-2017 13:53:02 UTC Johnny Null

     in reply to

     • reality karen teaduck III
     @reality Fine, you give up. Well done.
   • reality karen teaduck III (reality@quitter.se)'s status on Tuesday, 27-Jun-2017 13:53:24 UTC reality karen teaduck III

     in reply to
     @johnnynull no, i've listened for long enough and i'm still convinced your opinion is stupid
   • Johnny Null (johnnynull@freezepeach.xyz)'s status on Tuesday, 27-Jun-2017 13:54:08 UTC Johnny Null

     in reply to

     • reality karen teaduck III
     @reality Also you fucking know full well I read quite a bit. This is foolishness.
   • Johnny Null (johnnynull@freezepeach.xyz)'s status on Tuesday, 27-Jun-2017 13:54:24 UTC Johnny Null

     in reply to

     • reality karen teaduck III
     @reality k.
   • reality karen teaduck III (reality@quitter.se)'s status on Tuesday, 27-Jun-2017 13:56:36 UTC reality karen teaduck III

     in reply to
     @johnnynull well okay, i suppose that is unfair: read a relevant book! u seem to have a poor grasp of how logic was/is developed/applied
   • Johnny Null (johnnynull@freezepeach.xyz)'s status on Tuesday, 27-Jun-2017 14:01:41 UTC Johnny Null

     in reply to

     • reality karen teaduck III
     @reality And you're stuck in the past. We've evolved. Either way we've gotten nowhere.
   • Johnny Null (johnnynull@freezepeach.xyz)'s status on Wednesday, 28-Jun-2017 23:41:14 UTC Johnny Null

     • Ruben
     @tregeagle I'd say a long, laborious F(art).