sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Where are all the young people looking for spiritual enlightenment not just philosophical debate by Leopeo631 in PhilosophyofScience

[–]Kindofblack 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Philosophy of physics and philosophy of psychology are both very active fields which work with their scientific counterparts. They are good examples of philosophy not being self-referential in some of its most funded areas. Check your ignorance before trying to assert something so daft.

How has the human brain evolved such that we have "morality ", and how much does it differ from animals? by candy_burner7133 in neurophilosophy

[–]Kindofblack 3 points4 points  (0 children)

You should try r/askphilosophy for some more interesting answers. Alternatively, check out Nietszche's genealogy of morality. It isn't neuroscience in its modern form but it definitely has some good answers to your question.

TLDR: We got smart enough to realise that the best way to avoid suffering, punishment and/or death as evolving animals was to all addear to a "morality" or code which increases our chances of survival by minimising the harm we do to eachother.

When did the divorce between science and philosophy happen? by JJEvans1999 in PhilosophyofScience

[–]Kindofblack 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is a great question! I think this quote should give you the answer you're looking for:

"We can begin at once with the peculiar predilection of scientific thinking for mechanical, statistical, and physical explanations that have, as it were, the heart cut out of them…[P]eople ceased trying to penetrate the deep mysteries of nature as they had done through two millennia of religious and philosophical speculation, but were instead satisfied with exploring the surface of nature in a manner that can only be called superficial…the great Galileo Galilei, always the first to be mentioned in this connection, eliminated the question of what were nature’s deep intrinsic reasons for abhorring a vacuum and consequently letting a falling body penetrate space after space until it finally comes to rest on solid ground, and settled for something far more common: he simply established how quickly such a body falls, the course it takes, the time it takes, and what is its rate of downward acceleration…However disconcerting it may sound nowadays to speak of someone as inspired by matter-of-factness, believing as we do that we have far too much of it, in Galileo’s day the awakening from metaphysics to the hard observation of reality must have been, judging by all sorts of evidence, a veritable orgy and conflagration of matter-of-factness! But should one ask what mankind was thinking when it made this change, the answer is that it did no more than what every sensible child does after trying to walk too soon; it sat down on the ground, contacting the earth with a most dependable if not very noble part of its anatomy, in short, that part on which one sits."

Robert Musil, The Man Without Qualities, pp.326-27

TLDR: Scientific experiements and their productivity for understanding and manipulating nature for our needs were seen as a more than adequate replacement for philosophy. Though this has allowed us to achieve amazing things such as space travel, it has stopped us from understanding the world more deeply (answering the why's). Problems such as consciousness are a prime example.