What exactly do you think science that puts word of authority on high pedestal is? An exercise in scientific method? Philosophy clearly labels reasoning that hangs on word of experts/scientists/preists as argument from authority fallacy.
I am well aware that the current generation is being taught in formal education that consensus of experts represents truth. But that mistake is a different debate, deserves a dedicated discussion.
Philosophy is a creativity exercise. It’s archaic, and in modern terms, the first step in a long chain of steps to reach a conclusion.
You are mistaken in the belief that there is a debate here. Not everything is a debate. Not everything can have an opinion nor two sides of an argument. Reality unfortunately doesn’t work that way.
Philosophy is a creativity exercise. It’s archaic, and in modern terms, the first step in a long chain of steps to reach a conclusion.
Philosophy is the basis of accumulating knowledge, including science, medicine, and statistics. The highest formal degree in most academic disciplines is still called PhD, or Doctor of Philosophy in the concerned subject. If by calling philosophy archaic you mean that it is irrelevant, then modern knowledge automatically loses all authenticity.
You are mistaken in the belief that there is a debate here. Not everything is a debate. Not everything can have an opinion nor two sides of an argument. Reality unfortunately doesn’t work that way.
If parameters mentioned here are fed values of my choosing, I can agree with your opinion expressed here.
What exactly do you think science that puts word of authority on high pedestal is? An exercise in scientific method? Philosophy clearly labels reasoning that hangs on word of experts/scientists/preists as argument from authority fallacy.
I am well aware that the current generation is being taught in formal education that consensus of experts represents truth. But that mistake is a different debate, deserves a dedicated discussion.
Philosophy is a creativity exercise. It’s archaic, and in modern terms, the first step in a long chain of steps to reach a conclusion.
You are mistaken in the belief that there is a debate here. Not everything is a debate. Not everything can have an opinion nor two sides of an argument. Reality unfortunately doesn’t work that way.
Philosophy is the basis of accumulating knowledge, including science, medicine, and statistics. The highest formal degree in most academic disciplines is still called PhD, or Doctor of Philosophy in the concerned subject. If by calling philosophy archaic you mean that it is irrelevant, then modern knowledge automatically loses all authenticity.
If parameters mentioned here are fed values of my choosing, I can agree with your opinion expressed here.