# What is the future of Philosophy?



## jwoodie

I have always been interested in philosophy as it applies to logic, but not so much for the musings of individuals attempting to fill voids in scientific knowledge.  For example, the Roman poet and philosopher Lucretius postulated the existence of atoms nearly 2,000 year ago.  Although he displayed amazing insight (and eloquence), modern science has rendered this speculation obsolete.  Rather, I find greater value in the calculations of Copernicus, who disproved an Earth-centric universe.

Today, what are the values of philosophical prognostications (except as they relate to scientific research)?  Perhaps because of a lack of personal investment in any particular result, I am more willing to let the secrets of the universe unfold than to worry about things that are not yet revealed.

Your thoughts?


----------



## BuckToothMoron




----------



## jwoodie

No need to post personal pictures,


----------



## MisterBeale

jwoodie said:


> I have always been interested in philosophy as it applies to logic, but not so much for the musings of individuals attempting to fill voids in scientific knowledge.  For example, the Roman poet and philosopher Lucretius postulated the existence of atoms nearly 2,000 year ago.  Although he displayed amazing insight (and eloquence), modern science has rendered this speculation obsolete.  Rather, I find greater value in the calculations of Copernicus, who disproved an Earth-centric universe.
> 
> Today, what are the values of philosophical prognostications (except as they relate to scientific research)?  Perhaps because of a lack of personal investment in any particular result, I am more willing to let the secrets of the universe unfold than to worry about things that are not yet revealed.
> 
> Your thoughts?


*Could Multiple Personality Disorder Explain Life, the Universe and Everything?*
A new paper argues the condition now known as “dissociative identity disorder” might help us understand the fundamental nature of reality
Could Multiple Personality Disorder Explain Life, the Universe and Everything?


----------



## jwoodie

The concept of "universal consciousness" seems more like a religious theory.  On the other hand, "distributed intelligence" may apply to more than bee hives.  Do you see a connection between the two?


----------



## MisterBeale

jwoodie said:


> The concept of "universal consciousness" seems more like a religious theory.  On the other hand, "distributed intelligence" may apply to more than bee hives.  Do you see a connection between the two?


If every particle of energy and matter in the universe has it's own consciousness, I don't see much of a distinction any more between science, philosophy, spirituality, religion, etc. . . .


----------



## jwoodie

MisterBeale said:


> jwoodie said:
> 
> 
> 
> The concept of "universal consciousness" seems more like a religious theory.  On the other hand, "distributed intelligence" may apply to more than bee hives.  Do you see a connection between the two?
> 
> 
> 
> If every particle of energy and matter in the universe has it's own consciousness, I don't see much of a distinction any more between science, philosophy, spirituality, religion, etc. . . .
Click to expand...

 
Can you define "consciousness" within this context?


----------



## Karl Rand

jwoodie said:


> MisterBeale said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jwoodie said:
> 
> 
> 
> The concept of "universal consciousness" seems more like a religious theory.  On the other hand, "distributed intelligence" may apply to more than bee hives.  Do you see a connection between the two?
> 
> 
> 
> If every particle of energy and matter in the universe has it's own consciousness, I don't see much of a distinction any more between science, philosophy, spirituality, religion, etc. . . .
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Can you define "consciousness" within this context?
Click to expand...

Has anyone satisfactorilly defined consciousness, possibly different from describing what it is we experience when we think we are conscious. I’m happy to see it as simple iteration.


----------



## Karl Rand

jwoodie said:


> (_Apologies for duplication of part in previous post)_
> Can you define "consciousness" within this context?


A context too strange for my tiny little mind.
Has anyone satisfactorilly defined consciousness and what would constitute ’satisfactory’? Possibly different from describing what it is we experience when we think we are conscious. I’m happy to experience it as simple iteration . Until neorology nails it the disciples of Philosophy of Mind will probably toss this one back and forth till hell freezes over and maybe even then want to argue with the neurologists.


----------



## DustyInfinity

I don't know much about defining 'Consciousness' but I was always amazed by how relevant the questions asked hundreds of years ago still apply today.  What should government do, what is good and evil, what is just, ect.  As for logical though in relation to science, I don't think you need to be a chemist or a mathmatician to ask interesting questions.  As a matter a fact, scientists tend to make creative stories to explain what they don't understand.  I think philosophy will stay relevant as long as there are people.  I don't see any difference from asking questions in Ancient Greece, to asking questions now, or hundreds of years in the future.


----------



## Unkotare

MisterBeale said:


> jwoodie said:
> 
> 
> 
> The concept of "universal consciousness" seems more like a religious theory.  On the other hand, "distributed intelligence" may apply to more than bee hives.  Do you see a connection between the two?
> 
> 
> 
> If every particle of energy and matter in the universe has it's own consciousness, I don't see much of a distinction any more between science, philosophy, spirituality, religion, etc. . . .
Click to expand...



Originally, no one made any such distinction.


----------



## DustyInfinity

I know most in physics love the theory of multiple universes, and that has always bugged me a little.  I understand its creation to explain particle behavior, but I am surprised it is so widely accepted.  Sorry I'm off topic, but I had to throw in an example of thought filling in the gaps of knowledge.


----------



## Jonathan McCreevey

jwoodie said:


> I have always been interested in philosophy as it applies to logic, but not so much for the musings of individuals attempting to fill voids in scientific knowledge.  For example, the Roman poet and philosopher Lucretius postulated the existence of atoms nearly 2,000 year ago.  Although he displayed amazing insight (and eloquence), modern science has rendered this speculation obsolete.  Rather, I find greater value in the calculations of Copernicus, who disproved an Earth-centric universe.
> 
> Today, what are the values of philosophical prognostications (except as they relate to scientific research)?  Perhaps because of a lack of personal investment in any particular result, I am more willing to let the secrets of the universe unfold than to worry about things that are not yet revealed.
> 
> Your thoughts?


What would "get you invested" in any philosophy or idea? Seriously though.


----------



## jwoodie

Jonathan McCreevey said:


> jwoodie said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have always been interested in philosophy as it applies to logic, but not so much for the musings of individuals attempting to fill voids in scientific knowledge.  For example, the Roman poet and philosopher Lucretius postulated the existence of atoms nearly 2,000 year ago.  Although he displayed amazing insight (and eloquence), modern science has rendered this speculation obsolete.  Rather, I find greater value in the calculations of Copernicus, who disproved an Earth-centric universe.
> 
> Today, what are the values of philosophical prognostications (except as they relate to scientific research)?  Perhaps because of a lack of personal investment in any particular result, I am more willing to let the secrets of the universe unfold than to worry about things that are not yet revealed.
> 
> Your thoughts?
> 
> 
> 
> What would "get you invested" in any philosophy or idea? Seriously though.
Click to expand...

I am more interested in the practical aspects of life, i.e., what works and what doesn't work.  For example, Capitalism works and Socialism doesn't work because the former "capitalizes" on human nature.  I think all religions have something to offer in the realm of human psychology, but trying to understand the ultimate issues of our existence is  a fool's errand.  But it is less destructive than nihilism.


----------



## Unkotare

jwoodie said:


> ... trying to understand the ultimate issues of our existence is  a fool's errand.  ...



The wisdom of fools can be revelatory.


----------



## Jonathan McCreevey

MisterBeale said:


> jwoodie said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have always been interested in philosophy as it applies to logic, but not so much for the musings of individuals attempting to fill voids in scientific knowledge.  For example, the Roman poet and philosopher Lucretius postulated the existence of atoms nearly 2,000 year ago.  Although he displayed amazing insight (and eloquence), modern science has rendered this speculation obsolete.  Rather, I find greater value in the calculations of Copernicus, who disproved an Earth-centric universe.
> 
> Today, what are the values of philosophical prognostications (except as they relate to scientific research)?  Perhaps because of a lack of personal investment in any particular result, I am more willing to let the secrets of the universe unfold than to worry about things that are not yet revealed.
> 
> Your thoughts?
> 
> 
> 
> *Could Multiple Personality Disorder Explain Life, the Universe and Everything?*
> A new paper argues the condition now known as “dissociative identity disorder” might help us understand the fundamental nature of reality
> Could Multiple Personality Disorder Explain Life, the Universe and Everything?
Click to expand...

Order in the court. There will be order. Even McDonalds functions better than those theories.


----------



## jackflash

jwoodie said:


> I have always been interested in philosophy as it applies to logic, but not so much for the musings of individuals attempting to fill voids in scientific knowledge.  For example, the Roman poet and philosopher Lucretius postulated the existence of atoms nearly 2,000 year ago.  Although he displayed amazing insight (and eloquence), modern science has rendered this speculation obsolete.  Rather, I find greater value in the calculations of Copernicus, who disproved an Earth-centric universe.
> 
> Today, what are the values of philosophical prognostications (except as they relate to scientific research)?  Perhaps because of a lack of personal investment in any particular result, I am more willing to let the secrets of the universe unfold than to worry about things that are not yet revealed.
> 
> Your thoughts?


Don't look for Philosophy to be put on the shelf any time soon. Philosophy = conscious thought/study & evaluation. It's basis is the study of knowledge itself(mind bender!), as well as what reality is to humanity. Philosophy both explores & EXPANDS our(humanity) existence & beyond. ALL law, government, morals & religions(belief systems) & a lot more are all created off of Philosophy.


----------



## jwoodie

Unkotare said:


> jwoodie said:
> 
> 
> 
> ... trying to understand the ultimate issues of our existence is  a fool's errand.  ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The wisdom of fools can be revelatory.
Click to expand...


What wisdom of fools have you found to be revelatory?

*re·vel·a·to·ry
/ˈrevələˌtôrē/*
adjective

1.  revealing something hitherto unknown


----------

