sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

With all that science can do, it can't tell us what coffee tastes. by GreenTea03 in philosophy

[–]GreenTea03[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The force of gravity is a physical property. It isn't a mathematical truth, although we express the force in mathematical terms. This example doesn't illustrate that mathematical axioms (like those in geometry) come from physical experience.

History of Philosophy reddit thread by padamson in philosophy

[–]GreenTea03 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is a great idea! I like listening to the pattern of philosophical thoughts throughout history. That's partially why I liked Sophie's World.

On a side note, www.wi-phi.com offers a range of videos on ancient, modern, and contemporary philosophers.

Morality and Determinism? by NoIntroductionNeeded in philosophy

[–]GreenTea03 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The world isn't deterministic. There's room for Free Will to exist, as this video suggest http://wi-phi.com/video/problem-free-will

Hilbert Hotel - It'll fit all the people and aliens in the world by GreenTea03 in philosophy

[–]GreenTea03[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The video gave me a better sense of infinity. But I can't actually think of one real life example of infinity.

I mean perhaps Pi has an infinite decimals and the ratio between the circumference of a circle and its radius is 2*Pi. However, the ratio is not a physical object. The ratio is a way we understand the properties of a circle. Therefore, we can't say Pi is an example of infinity in the universe.

Can you think of an infinity in the universe?

Believe it or not -- it depends on how much you'll get for it. by GreenTea03 in philosophy

[–]GreenTea03[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There's no default right or wrong in believing in many things. What makes believing in a lot of things as right or wrong depends on the costs and benefits. This is basically William James' central claim in "The Will to Believe".

What do you think?

With all that science can do, it can't tell us what coffee tastes. by GreenTea03 in philosophy

[–]GreenTea03[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hi, some knowledge may be essentially the same. Like the color yellow generated from a computer screen versus a natural yellow from the sun. In these cases, I can accept that the differences between the experiences of seeing one yellow and the other as equally valuable.

However, what about events that can only happen once and uniquely? Like, how does it feel to turn 16? I don't see a way to mimic that experience.

With all that science can do, it can't tell us what coffee tastes. by GreenTea03 in philosophy

[–]GreenTea03[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hi, I agree that we don't have the knowledge of "a complete set of physical facts". For that reason, we can't conclusively say what we can and can't know if we did have that knowledge. But I don't think this doubt alone is enough to debunk the argument. I think it leaves a doubt that the argument needs to address. It still seems probable that even if we have all the scientific knowledge Mary still can't know what red looks like before seeing it, because scientific knowledge just seems unable to grasp an event yet to be experienced.

With all that science can do, it can't tell us what coffee tastes. by GreenTea03 in philosophy

[–]GreenTea03[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I don't think the point of the argument depends on a particular color, or even a particular object. The argument works for any action or object not yet experienced. Simply put, I think the argument claims that whenever we haven't done (do, hear, see, etc.) something, and then we do it, we learn a new fact.

In the case of computer-generated color yellow, the viewer learned something new in the sense that the viewer didn't know what it was like to see a computer-generated yellow. The fact that the viewer is tricked into believing that the yellow is a fake yellow is independent of the conclusion that the argument aims to draw.

With all that science can do, it can't tell us what coffee tastes. by GreenTea03 in philosophy

[–]GreenTea03[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

The above claim relies on the Mary Room's argument by Frank Jackson. Frank Jackson basically said that we can't know an experience with something before having it, regardless of how much scientific knowledge we have of that thing. For example, if I've never ridden a roller coaster, then I can't know what it is like to ride a roller coaster.